COCP No. 2201 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No. 2201 of 2010 Date of decision:- 30.11.2010 Ms. Ravi Bala Jain and others ...... petitioners vs. Sh. J.P.Kaushik and others ......respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: - Ms. Shashi Jain, Advocate for the petitioners HEMANT GUPTA, J (ORAL) Petitioners as the members of a Co-operative Society, submitted a representation on 12.11.2009 and thereafter served a legal notice on 24.11.2009 alleging the misdeeds of the former office bearers of that Co-operative Society. The members have claimed that the entire record including the accounts of the society may be got recovered and seized and loss caused to the Society by the negligence of the office bearers be recovered from the said office bearers. This Court passed an order on 7.7.2010 directing the Registrar Co-operative Societies to decide the representation and the legal notice within 30 days. In terms of the directions of this Court, the Registrar Co- operative Societies has passed detailed order on 16.10.2009, deciding the legal notice submitted by the petitioners. It has been ordered to the following effect: - This legal notice dated 24.11.2008 (i.e. Annexure P-10 of Civil writ Petition No. 93/2010) was also received by this office on COCP No. 2201 of 2010 -2- 27.11.2009, after examining in this office, the manner was referred to DRCS Kurukshetra to inquire in to the allegations leveled against the Ex-office bearers of the society. Now the enquiry report dated 13.9.2010 has been received on 17.9.2009. As the enquiry officer has not joined the Ex-president and other members of the Managing Committee in this enquiry. He has submitted his report on the basis of the record and representation. He has not categorically pointed out how much loss has been caused to the society and what is the share of the erring members in this loss. Without this information surcharge proceedings U/S 101 of the Haryana Co-operative Society Act, 1984 can not be initiated for recovery of loss. In the light of the above observation, I am of the considered view that further action as per law is required to be taken in this case after getting following information: - (i) Special Audit Report of the Society for the period (w.e.f. 1996 to up to date) (ii)Report of the present Managing Committee of the society. (iii)Report of the DRCS Kurukshetra about responsibility of loss of 20% of the cost. The action will be taken as per law after getting the above report. So, this legal notice is disposed of accordingly. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the Registrar Co-operative Societies has not passed any order of recovery of loss nor has seized the record of the society. Therefore, the orders passed by this Court have not been given effect to. The Registrar Co-operative Societies has considered all the aspects and passed an order for conduct of special audit and also sought COCP No. 2201 of 2010 -3- report of the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Kurukshetra apart from the report of the present Managing Committee. If the petitioners are aggrieved against any part of the order passed by the Registrar Co-operative Societies, it shall be open to the petitioners to take recourse to the remedies available to the petitioners but it cannot be said that the legal notice or representation has not been decided by the Registrar Co-operative Societies as per the directions of this Court. In view of the said fact, no further orders are called for in the present contempt petition. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 30.11.2010 preeti