WP(C) 6170/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Matin, l earned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. MU Mahmud, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 i.e. the applicant in Misc. Case No. 255/08, by which a pr ayer has been to vacate the interim order dated 5.12.2007 passed in the writ pet ition. The petitioners are aggrieved by the Annexure-9 order dated 20.11.2007, by which the Registrar of Co-operative Society provided arrangement for running of the office of the Pachim Jania Samabai Samity Limited and its sub-centers fro m the particular place. Prior to this order, the Registrar passed Annexure-8 ord er dated 22.6.2007 providing the location of the office otherwise than the locat ion provided in the impugned order dated 20.11.2007. Annexure-8 order dated 22.6.2007 was passed pursuant to the direction of this Court in WP(C) No. 5024/2006, which was disposed of by judgment and order dated 5.4.2007. As per the said direction, necessary enquiry was to be caused and therea fter to determine the place, wherefrom the office-cum-godown of the society coul d be most effectively and conveniently operational for the benefit of the societ y’s shareholders/consumers in general and to pass appropriate orders as might be deemed fit and proper. It was the case of the petitioners that the order dated 22.6.2007 was pa ssed taking into account the enquiry report furnished by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Thus, according to the petitioners, the said order c ould not have been set at naught by passing the impugned order dated 20.11.2007 (Annexure-9) and that too without providing any opportunity of being heard to th e petitioners. Mr. Mahmud, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 submits that the or der dated 22.6.2007 was passed without taking into account the enquiry report da ted 16.6.2007 (Annexure-4 to the Misc. Case No. 255/2008), although, there is me ntion of some enquiry report in the order dated 22.6.2007. According to him, whe n that aspect of the matter was brought to the notice of the Registrar of Co-ope rative Society, he passed the impugned order dated 20.11.2007. On the other hand, Mr. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner s submits that the impugned order dated 20.11.2007 does not reflect the contenti on raised by Mr. Mahmud. He further submits that the impugned order so passed, d oes not speak of the purported enquiry report dated 16.6.2007. Admittedly, the impugned order dated 20.11.2007 (Annexure-9) has been pa ssed without affording any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. They w ere satisfied with the earlier order dated 22.6.2007 and in case of any modifica tion thereof adversely affecting the petitioners, it was the incumbent on the pa rt of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to provide the effected parties op portunity of being heard, about which admittedly was not done before passing of the impugned order. In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to t he Registrar to pass fresh order upon hearing both the parties and taking into a ccount all relevant aspects of the matter. He will also consider the enquiry rep ort dated 16.6.2007, which, however, learned counsel for the petitioners is doub tful. No opinion is expressed in this regard. Entire exercise shall be carried out as expeditiously as possible. It is expected that the exercise shall be carried out within 29.2.2008. Since, now th e Registrar will have to pass fresh order, the impugned order dated 20.11.2007 ( Annexure-9) stands set aside and quashed. Both the parties may appear before the Registrar of Co-operative Societi es with a certified copy of this order and/or any other material, which may be r equired for proper disposal of the matter. Writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions.