IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 6250/2010 Decided on:1.10.2010. The Kohinoor Sarvhitkari Transport Cooperative Society. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. ... Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. for respondents No.1,2 and 4. Mr. R.L. Sood, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate & Mr. Arjun Lal, Advocate for respondent No.3 Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.5. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice (oral): The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: a) That a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued for quashing order dated 24.9.2010 passed by the respondent No.2, whereby the 25% share of transportation work allotted to Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2 District Bilaspur has been illegally and arbitrary distributed among societies (Annexure P-4). b) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant the petitioner society its appropriate share by taking 160 members of the petitioner society as those members who have lost their land and 544 as its affected members. c) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to distribute the work of transportation on the basis of number of persons who have los land and not on the basis of the area acquired. 2. In the nature of order, we propose to pass in this petition, it is not necessary to go into the various contentions taken up by the parties. Essentially, the impugned order is passed by the Registrar appointed under the Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1968. In Annexure P-3, judgment, this Court had, in fact, directed the Registrar to exercise its supervisory powers. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, appeal lies to the Government against Annexure P-4, order passed by the Registrar. Therefore, it will be open to the petitioner to pursue the matter before the Government and it will also be open to the parties, on either side, to take all available contentions before the Government. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is disposed of as follows: In the event of petitioner filing an appeal against Annexure P-4 within a period of one week from today before the Government, the matter will be considered by the 3 Secretary to the Government, who is competent to consider the appeal, with notice to the petitioner and respondents Nos. 3,5, 6 and 7 and any other affected party. Final orders in that regard shall be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of appeal. Petitioner immediately will produce the copy of this judgment alongwith copy of the writ petition before the Government. 2. Under section 95 of the Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, we find that the Government is also competent to pass appropriate interlocutory orders; therefore, we make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to move the Government for appropriate interim order. In order to enable the petitioner to work out the reliefs, as above, status quo as obtaining on today will continue for a further period of ten days. 3. We make it clear that all contentions regarding rights, privileges etc. of the parties are left open. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. 5. Copy Dasti today itself. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma) Judge. 1,10.2010. *awasthi*