IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10532 of 2010 1. BIRENDRA CHOUDHARY S/O LATE BABU LAL CHOUDHARY R/O VILL.- MALAHITOLA, P.O.- DHOBNI, P.S.- LAURIYA, DISTT.- WEST CHAMPARAN ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. DIRECTOR, FISHERIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. DISTRICT FISHERY OFFICER, WEST CHAMPARAN-CUM-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WEST CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH ---- RESPONDENTS For the petitioner :- Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shashi Shekhar Pd. Sinha, A.C. to G.P. IX ----------- 2 12.7.2010 The petitioner has challenged the order of the Registrar Cooperative dated 3.11.2009 by which he has directed the Administrator of the Lauriya Anchal Matasaijivi Sahyog Samiti Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Society’) not to perform any other work of the Society except to hold elections of the Society. The Registrar is interpreted Section 14(10) of the Bihar Registration Act, 1945 to mean that the Administrator has only been appointed for the purposes of holding elections. The language of Section 14(10) is quite clear and envisages that once a Society has been superseded, the business of the Society shall be carried on in the manner provided by the section. This cannot mean that apart from holding elections, the Administrator cannot perform any of the other duties. Section 41(7) further envisages that “The Registrar may issue such direction to the Administrator as to his powers and duties and the affairs of registered society as the Registrar deems desirable and the Administrator may apply to the Registrar at any time for instruction as to the manner in which the Administrator shall conduct the management of the registered society”. 2 In the present case, the Administrator has apparently been appointed by Memo No. 6 dated 25.1.2010. He was to conduct the elections within a period of nine months however, apparently the election has not been conducted. The Society cannot function without performing the day to day function relating to settlement of fishery rights amongst its members, once the Society has been allotted Jalkars by the District Fisheries Officer. It would have been proper for the Registrar to direct that the day to day function of the society should continue uninterrupted and the Administrator should perform all such functions which would be in the best interest of the society in question. It cannot be the intention of the legislature while enacting the provisions that once the Society is superseded and the Administrator is appointed, the society should be left in a vacuum for the very purpose for enacting the law with respect to regulation of the society would be defeated by passing an order restraining the Administrator from performing the duties of the managing committee while he is an Administrator of the society. One of the fall outs of the order of the Registrar is that the Administrator is not depositing the revenue to be paid by the Society in lieu of the settlement awarded to them earlier, which would in fact disqualify the Society from being issued parwana in lieu of the settlement made with the Society. This would indeed be to the disadvantage of the Society which cannot be permitted if the Society is otherwise functioning in a proper manner. I direct that the Registrar should direct the 3 Administrator to deposit the revenue so that the Society is not disqualified on account of non payment of the settlement amount. In the result, I quash the order of the Registrar issued vide letter no. 6826 dated 3.11.2009 and direct that the Registrar should take steps in getting the election of the society held through the Administrator and further direct that the Registrar should immediately issue instructions to the Administrator to perform the duties of the managing committee in the interim period. This application is allowed in the terms mentioned aforesaid. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)