IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION (S/S) NO. 2753 OF 2001 Satendra Singh …………..Petitioner. Versus Dy. Cane Commissioner/Arbitrator, Haldwani and another. ……………Respondents. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner. The petitioner, who was an employee of a Cooperative Society, namely, Kishan Sahkari Chini Mill Ltd., Rajpur, was charged for embezzlement and other financial irregularities and consequently, his services were suspended on 7.10.1995. Thereafter, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, which culminated finally into the termination of the services of the petitioner vide order dated 15/19.11.1997. This order of termination of service, according to the counsel for the petitioner, has not been challenged by him before any authority. Meanwhile, a criminal proceeding was initiated against the petitioner by means of an F.I.R. dated 10.10.1995 on the same charges as mentioned above, which was registered as Case Crime No. 339/95 under Section 409/420/467/468/471 I.P.C. Consequent to the termination of the service of the petitioner, a recovery was to be made from the petitioner, which was finally referred to the Registrar Cooperative Societies under Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 2 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 70 of the Act reads as under: “70. Disputes which may be referred to arbitration.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, if any dispute relating to the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society other than a dispute regarding disciplinary action taken against a paid servant of a society arises— (a) among members, past members and person claiming through members, past members and deceased members; or (b) between a member, past member or any person claiming through a member, past member or deceased member, and the society, its committee of management or any officer, agent or employee of the society, including any past officer, agent or employee; or (c) between the society or its committee and any past committee, any officer, agent or employee or any past officer, past agent or past employee or the nominee, heir or legal representative of any deceased officer, deceased agent, or deceased employee of the society; or (d) between a co-operative society and any other co-operative society or societies; such dispute shall be referred to the Registrar for action in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceeding in respect of any such dispute : [Provided that a dispute relating to an election under the provisions of this Act or rules made thereunder shall not be referred to the Registrar until after the declaration of the result of such election.] (2) For the purpose of sub-section (1), the following shall be deemed to be included in dispute relating to the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society, namely-- (a) claims for amounts due when a demand for payment is made and is either refused or not complied with whether such claims are admitted or not by the opposite party; (b) a claim by a surety against the principal debtor where the society has recovered from the surety any amount in respect of any debt or demand due to it from the principal debtor as a 3 result of the default of the principal debtor or whether such debt or demand is admitted or not ; (c) a claim by a society for any loss caused to it by a member, officer, agent, or employee including past or deceased member, officer, agent, or employee, whether individually or collectively and whether such loss be admitted or not; and (d) all matters relating to the objects of the society mentioned in the bye-laws as also those relating to the election of office-bearers. (3) If any question arises whether a dispute referred to the Registrar under this section is a dispute relating to the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society, the decision thereon of the Registrar shall be final and shall not be called in question in any court.” The main ground for challenge in the writ petition is that the Registrar Cooperative Societies cannot take cognizance of the matter. Once a notice has been issued to the petitioner, the petitioner can only take these objections before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. A perusal of Section 70 of the Act shows that the dispute relating to constitution, management or the business of a cooperative society other than a dispute regarding disciplinary action taken against a paid servant of a society as well as past members before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. Therefore, prima facie, it is clear that the Registrar Cooperative Societies has powers to decide the matter under Section 70 read with Section 71 of the Act. The Registrar, Cooperative has power to decide a dispute himself or by referring the same for decision to an arbitrator appointed by him. In the present case, the Deputy Cane Commissioner has been appointed as an Arbitrator to decide the dispute. The matter is still pending before the Arbitrator. Since the matter has been referred before respondent no. 1 under Section 70/71 of the Act, the petitioner must first pursue his remedy before the designated authority. 4 The Writ Petition, therefore, has no merit and is liable to be dismissed and is being dismissed. Stay order, if any, is also vacated. A certified copy of this order shall be furnished to Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand free of cost to communicate the same to respondent no. 1. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 26.3.2010 Rathour