IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4887 of 2004 1.SRI GANESH VASTRA BHANDAR through its proprietor Priya Ranjan swon of Sri Dwarika BHAGAT, R/o Chitkohara Bazar P.S. Gardanibagh, District Patna. 2. Dwarika Bhagat S/o late Janki Prasad R/O Chitkohara Bazar, P.S. Gardanibagh, District Patna. 3. Savitri Kumari W/O late Shayam Narayan, R/O Chitkohara Bazar, P.S. Gardanibagh District Patna. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH Registrat Cooperative Societies, Bihar, patna. 2.The Registrar Cooperative Societies, Bihar, Patna. 3.The District Cooperative Office –cum-Certificate Officer, Patna 4.Bombay Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd, Ppatna through Branch Manager, Hermitage Building, Frazer Road, Patna. 5.The Branch Manager, Bombay Mercantile Cooperative Bank Ltd. Patna through Branch Manager, Hermitage Building, Frazer Road, Patna ….Respondents. ----------- For the petitioners: Kumar Alok Advocate For Respondent no. 4 & 4: Kumar Ranjoy, Advocate. For respondent State : Anshuman Singh, Advocate. ------------ 3 28.03.2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved by an order contained in memo No 173/R-2, Patna dated 15th June, 2001 passed by the Registrar Co-operative Societies, Bihar, Patna in award case No.87/2000 (Bombay Mercantile Coop. Bank Ltd. Vs. Sri Ganesh Vastra Bhandar and others). It is admitted case of the parties that a dispute was raised in terms of Section 74 of The Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and settlement of dispute was made in terms of Section 76 by the Central Registrar. 3. After hearing the parties at length, this Court 2 finds that the order impugned is appealable under Section 90 of the Act and is further revisable under Section 92 of the Act. Apparently petitioners have not exhausted alternative remedy of appeal and revision. 4. Disputed questions of fact are required to be examined by the Statutory Authority. In that view of the matter, this petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioners to file an appeal in terms of Section 90 of the Act before the Appellate Authorities within a period of five weeks from today. If such an appeal is filed, within the time prescribed and a prayer for condonation of delay is made, then the Appellate Authority shall take into consideration the fact that the petitioners have come before this Court challenging the validity of the said order and the matter remained pending before this Court for quite a long time. The appellate authority shall be obliged to condone the delay and shall decide the matter on merit in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of fling of such an appeal by the petitioners. 5. Till the period of five weeks, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners. 6. However, it is made clear that, if the petitioners do not file appeal before the appellate authority within the time stipulated by this court, then it 3 shall be construed that the interim protection granted by this court either by order dated 13.08.2007 or by the present order for a period of five weeks stood finally withdrawn and the authorities shall be free to take all consequential actions against the petitioners. Rahman/ (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)