IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5222 of 2008 1.ADAPUR PRAKHAND MATSYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED through its Chief Executive Dhaneshwar Mukhiya. 2. Dahaneshwar Mukhiya son of Ramdeni Mukhiya, resident of village & P.S. Katgeniya Mahuwawa,District- East Champaran. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 2.Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandary and Fisheries, Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 3. Director Fisheries, Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 4. R.N.Choudhary, Director Fisheries,Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 5.Deputy Director Fisheries,Muzaffarpur. 6. The District Fisheries Officer-cum- Chief Executive Officer,East Champaran. 7. Adarsh Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Adapur District-East Champaran, through its Chief Executive Jasbeer Sahani son of Nagendra Sahani, resident of village-Laxmipur, P.S. Adampur,District-East Champaran. 8. Adapur Prakhand Matsyajivi Sahayog Samiti Ltd., through its Secretary Sudama Sahani son of Nagendra Sahani, resident of village- Laxmipur, P.S.Adapur,District-East Champaran. 9. Arbind Kumar Sahani son of Jado Lal Sahani, resident of village- Kadamvan, P.S.- Ghorasahan,District-East Champaran. with MJC No.969 of 2008 RAHUL KUMAR son of Bhola Sahni, resident of village- Sukhiahiya,P.S.Darpa,District-East Champaran. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Ravi Kant S/o not known to the petitioner, Commissioner-Cum- Secretary, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Narsingh Upadhyay S/o- not known to the petitioner, Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. Suryadeo Mahta S/o not known to the petitioner, Duputy Registrar (Cane), Co-operative Societies, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. Anirudha Prasad Singh S/o not known to the petitioner, Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 6. Arvind Paswan, S/o not known to the petitioner, Assistant Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Sikrahna Circle, East Champaran, Motihari 7. Binod Sahni S/o Sri Kamal Sahni, resident of village- Sukhlahiya, P.O. Darpa, District- East Champaran. 8. Umesh Mukhiya S/o Rajbanshi Mukhiya, resident of village & P.O. Tinkoni, District- East Champaran, Motihari. - 2 - 9. Narmdeshwar Lal, Son of not known to the petitioner, District Magistrate,East Champaran, Motihari. with MJC No.899 of 2008 RAHUL KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS with CWJC No.8684 of 2008 ARBIND KUMAR SAHNI, S/o Ladolal Sahni, resident of village and P.O. Kodarywan Bhalwahian, P.S.- Ghorasahan, District- East Champaran. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the Principal Secretary, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.The Principal Secretary, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Bihar Co-operative Tribunal, through its Secretary, Biscomaun Tower, Patna. 4. The Chairman Bihar Co-operative Tribunal, Biscomaun Tower, Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 5. K.K. Mahto S/o name not known to the petitioner, Chairman, Bihar Co- operative Tribunal, Biscomaun Tower, Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 6. Babulal Mukhiya S/o Bhaju Mukhiya, resident of village- Katkenwa, P.S. Nakardai, P.O. Bhawanipur Bazar, District- East Champaran, Motihari. 7. Adapur Prakhand Adarsh Matsyajivi Swablambi Co-operative Society Ltd.through its present Chief Executive, Motihari, East Champaran. 8. Dhaneshwar Mukhiya, Chief Executive of Adapur Prakhand Adarsh Matsyajivi Swablambi Co-operative Society Ltd. at Mahuawa, P.O. & P.S.- Mahuawa. 9. Rajesh Mukhiyua S/0- Babulal Mukhiya, Chairman at Katkemwa, P.O.- Bhawanipur Bazar, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). 10. Shrawan Sahni S/o- Bishwa nath Sahni at kala Sirsia, P.O.- Adapur, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). 11. Asha Mukhiya S/o- Nathuni Mukhiya, at katkenwa, P.O.- Bhawanipur Bazar, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). 12. Bishnu Mukhiya S/o- Anup Mukhiya at Katkenwa, P.O.- Bhawanipur Bazar, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). 13.Mangni Mukhiya S/o- Deo Narain Mukhiya at katkatwa, P.O.- Majharia, District- Motihari (East Champaran). 14. Sunita Devi W/o- Nand Lal Mukhiya, at katkatwa, P.O.- Majharia, District- Motihari (East Champaran). 15. Dela Mukhiya S/o- Name not known to the petitioner at katkatwa, P.O.- Majharia, District- Motihari (East Champaran). 16. Usha Devi W/o- Braj Kishore Mukhiya, at Nakardai, P.O.- Bhawanipur Bazar, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). 17. Sanjeet Mukhiya S/o- Mabhu Mukhiya, at Nakardai, P.O.- Bhawanipur Bazar, District- Motihari, (East Champaran). ----------- For the Petitioner(In CWJC No.5222/08) : M/s Chitrtanjan Sinha,Sr.Adv. Mr. Binodanand Mishra For respondent no.9 : Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey,Sr.Adv. - 3 - Mr. Chakrapani For the State : Dr.Anil Kr. Upadhyay,S.C.21 For the Petitioner(In CWJC No.8684/08) : Mr. Kamal Nayan Choybey,Sr.Adv. Mr. Chakrapani For respondent no.8 : Mr. Chitranjan Sinha,Sr.Adv. Mr. Binodanand Mishra For the State : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal. In MJC No. 969/08 For Opposite Party : Mr. Rashid Izhar 14 27.11.2008 In CWJC No.5222 of 2008, the writ petitioners have challenged the order of Director Fisheries, Govt. of Bihar,Patna, by which on an appeal filed by respondent no.9, the settlement was cancelled. It would be contended that the appeal itself was not maintainable because Chief Executive Officer, who filed the appeal was not the Chief Executive Officer of the said Co-operative. CWJC No. 8684 of 2008 was filed by the respondent no.9 of the 1st writ petition in which he challenged the interim order of the Co- operative Tribunal whereby the Co-operative Tribunal had restrained the petitioner of the second writ petition from working as the Executive Officer of the Co-operative. Both the matters along with certain interim matters of contempt were taken up together. This Court found, as recorded in order dated 30.6.2008, that the primal question that arises is as to who is or was and who is the Chairman of Adapur Prakhand Matsyajivi Swawlambi Sahakari Samiti Limited because it is on that question the fate of appeal before Director Fisheries depends. It was then brought to the notice of this Court that the dispute with regard to the office bearer of the Self Supporting Co-operative Society was before the Co-operative Tribunal and therefore after noticing the controversy, the matter was left to the Co- operative Tribunal to be decided by the said order of this Court dated - 4 - 30.6.2008. While doing so, this Court categorically noted that this would ordinarily have led to disposal of the writ petitions but the parties have apprehension ( of the matter before the Co-operative Tribunal not being expeditiously disposed of) and as such the writ petition was kept pending. Now, it is not disputed by the parties that the Co-operative Tribunal has decided the matter as against the writ petitioner of the second writ petition. The matter has been re-listed. Parties have been heard. In my view, both the writ petitions are now all but in- fructuous. So far as first writ petitioner is concerned, the Tribunal having held that the writ petitioner of the second writ petition is not the Chief Executive of the Self Supporting Co-operative, the appeal filed before the Director Fisheries was thus incompetently filed. So far as second writ petition is concerned, as filed by the de- throned person, his remedy now lies as per Section 40(3) of the Bihar Self Supporting Co-operative Societies Act, 1996. A dispute of the nature with which we are concerned is a dispute squarely covered by Section 40(1) of the said Act and is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Co-operative Tribunal. Parties, as noticed above, were the Co-operative Tribunal and Co- operative Tribunal decided the matter, may be erroneous, as submitted by one of the parties, that gives the aggrieved party to file an appeal in terms of Section 40(3) of the said Act. There being a statutory appeal against the order of Co- operative Tribunal . in my view, this Court should ordinarily not interfere in the matter and leave the party to avail of alternative statutory remedy. - 5 - In my view, no case has been made out , for not invoking the rule of discretion. The writ applications are disposed of giving liberty to aggrieved party to move statutory appeal and it is only clarified that the order of the Director Fisheries, as impugned in the first writ petition does not survive as it was passed in an appeal, which was incompetently filed.The contempt applications and other applications are also accordingly disposed of. singh (Navaniti Pd.Singh)