WP(C) 3201/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY 10(ten) shareholders of Kazaikata Samabay Samiti Ltd., a society registe red under the provisions of Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 1949, who were elec ted in the Annual General Meeting of the society held on 28.01.2010 as members o f the Managing Committee and which proceeding was approved by the Assistant Regi strar of Cooperative Societies on 01.02.2010, has filed WP(C) No.3201/2010 chall enging the order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societi es in the appeal preferred by the respondent No.8 to 17 challenging the proceedi ng of the Annual General Meeting dated 28.01.2010 and the approval thereof by th e ARCS. By order dated 21.05.2010 the Registrar of Cooperative Societies has set aside the election of the office bearers of the Managing Committee held on 28.0 1.2010 on the ground that valid voters list was not prepared and the same was no t published as required under the law. 2. WP(C) No.3763/2010 has been filed by the petitioners, who were elected a s Chairman and Vice Chairman in the aforesaid meeting of the society held on 28. 01.2010, challenging the aforesaid order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Registra r of Cooperative Societies and also the order dated 19.06.2010 passed by the Joi nt Registrar of Cooperative Societies, whereby and whereunder the respondent No. 18 has been appointed as one man ad-hoc committee of the said society by canceli ng the earlier order dated 17.03.2010 appointing Sri Selim Khan, the Senior Insp ector of Cooperative Societies, Dhubri to manage the affairs of the said society . 3. WP(C) No.6378/2010 has been filed by Sri Abul Hashem, who was elected as Chairman of the society in the meeting dated 28.01.2010, challenging the author ity of respondent No.8, Anowar Hussain, to manage the affairs of the said societ y and to adopt the resolution in its meeting held on 26.11.2010. 4. I have heard Mr. M.U. Mondal, learned counsel appearing for the petition ers in WP(C) Nos.3201/2010 and 6378/2010, Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. A. Hussain appearing for the petitioners in WP(C) No.3763/2010, Mr. Soren, learned State counsel appearing for the State respondents including i ts officers and Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the private responde nts in all the three writ petitions. Since all the writ petitions relate to the election of the society held on 28.01.2010 and the subsequent order dated 21.05. 2010 passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, those are taken up for he aring and disposal together, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties . I have also perused the records of the appeal preferred by the private respond ent Nos.8 to 17 before the Registrar on the basis of which the order dated 21.05 .2010 has been passed. 5. Mr. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) Nos.3201/2010 a nd 6378/2010 has submitted that despite the order dated 22.03.2010 passed by thi s Court in WP(C) No.1779/2010 directing the Registrar of Cooperative Societies t o rehear and decide the appeal filed by the private respondents after giving not ice to all the elected members, though notice dated 21.04.2010 was shown to have been issued, no notice was however issued and served on the petitioners before passing the order dated 21.05.2010 by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies set ting aside the election of the petitioners, thereby denying the petitioners the reasonable opportunity of being heard. It has also been submitted by Mr. Mondal that since an interim order dated 11.06.2010 was passed in WP(C) No.3201/2010 di recting the parties to maintain status quo, as on that date, as regards the mana gement of the society, by order dated 19.06.2010 an one man ad-hoc committee has been appointed to manage the affairs of the society and such one man ad-hoc com mittee has adopted certain resolutions on 26.11.2010. According to the learned c ounsel, since such action on the part of the official respondents including the one man ad-hoc committee is contrary to the interim order dated 11.06.2010, the same needs interference. 6. Mr. Goswami, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP(C) No.3763/2010 challenging the order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar of C ooperative Societies has submitted that it is evident from the order passed that the Registrar has set aside the election as well as the proceeding of the socie ty dated 28.01.2010 without recording any clear and definite finding that the pr oper voters list was not published as required under the law before the election was held. Referring to the report dated 29.01.2010 of the Returning Officer app ointed by the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies to conduct the electi on, it has also been submitted by Mr. Goswami that it is evident from the said r eport that there was no discrepancy in the voters list and the election was held peacefully and without there being any objection from any quarter. Mr. Goswami further submits that even one of the appellants before the Registrar also partic ipated in the said proceeding of the society held on 28.01.2010, in the capacity of the election agent of a defeated candidate, who never at any point of time p rior to filing the appeal before the Registrar, objected to the preparation and publication of voters list, which according to Mr. Goswami was duly published an d such voters list was approved by the ARCS on 24.12.2009. Mr. Goswami submits t hat those factors have not been taken into consideration by the Registrar while passing the order dated 21.05.2010. 7. Mr. Soren, learned State counsel appearing for the State respondents as well as its officials, producing the records of the appeal, has submitted that t hough a copy of the notice dated 21.04.2010 issued by the Joint Registrar is ava ilable on record, there is, however, nothing on the records to suggest that such notices were issued to the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010, although there wa s a positive direction in the order dated 22.03.2010 passed in WP(C) No.1779/201 0 directing the Registrar of Cooperative Societies to rehear the appeal after gi ving notice to all the elected members. 8. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, on the other hand supporting the order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar of Coo perative Societies, has submitted that in fact, the notices dated 21.04.2010 wer e issued to all the elected members including the President and the Vice Preside nt of the society, who were elected in the proceeding dated 28.01.2010, fixing 2 8.04.2010 as the date of hearing of the appeal filed by the private respondents, accordingly the President and the Vice President as well as the elected members (petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010) had appeared before the Registrar on 28.04. 2010, who heard the appeal in their presence. Mr. Ahmed further submits that whi le the Registrar asked the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010 to file their atten dance in writing, they refused to do so. Mr. Ahmed, therefore, submits that the grounds taken in WP(C) No.3201/2010 in challenging the order dated 21.05.2010 th at they did not know about the proceeding before the Registrar, is not sustainab le. It has also been submitted by Mr. Ahmed that since there is no dispute relat ing to the service of notice on the petitioners in WP(C) No.3763/2010, the order of the Registrar dated 21.05.2010 may not be interfered with, on the ground of non-service of notice on those two persons. Mr. Ahmed in reply to the submission s made by Mr. Goswami, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP(C ) No.3763/2010 has also submitted that it is apparent from the impugned order da ted 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar that the correct voters list was not prep ared and published as required under the law and therefore no illegality has bee n committed by the Registrar in passing the impugned order. 9. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents further submits that the appeal preferred by them was initially allowed by the Registra r vide order dated 11.03.2010 by setting aside the proceeding of the society dat ed 28.01.2010 and thereafter one man ad-hoc committee was appointed vide order d ated 17.03.2010 to manage the affairs of the society till the fresh election is held after preparation and publication of the correct voters list, which order h owever was superseded by another order dated 19.06.2010 appointing another offic er as one man ad-hoc committee to manage the affairs of the society. It has been submitted by Mr. Ahmed that from 17.03.2010 the society being managed by one ma n ad-hoc committee appointed for that purpose, which cannot in any way allowed t o be managed by the persons elected on 28.01.2010, the said proceeding having be en set aside by the Registrar initially vide order dated 11.03.2010 and subseque nt vide order dated 21.05.2010, which is under challenge in the present writ pro ceedings. 10. On being asked Mr. Soren, learned State counsel has submitted that the r ecords maintained by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies does not reveal that the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010 were present on 28.04.2010 i.e. the date fixed for hearing by the private respondents. There is also no note to the effec t that though they appeared on that date, they refused to put their presence in writing. 11. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the pleadings as well as the records as made available by Mr. Soren, learned State counsel. 12. The Annual General Meeting of the society was held on 28.01.2010, on whi ch date the election of the office bearers of the Managing Committee of the soci ety was also held. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in WP(C) No.3763/2010 were elected in the said meeting as Chairman and Vice Chairman of the society respectively. The petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010 were elected as members of the Managing Co mmittee of the said society in the said meeting. The proceeding of the said meet ing thereafter was send to the approving authority, namely, the Assistant Regist rar of Cooperative Societies as required under proviso to Rule 26 of the Assam C ooperative Societies Rules framed under the provisions of the Act. The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies on 01.02.2010 approved the proceeding of the meeting of the society dated 28.01.2010, which includes the election of the off ice bearers of the Managing Committee of the society. An appeal was thereafter p referred by the private respondents before the Registrar of Cooperative Societie s under Section 80 of the Act, which was initially allowed by the Registrar vide order dated 11.03.2010. The said order was put to challenge by the petitioner N o.1 in WP(C) No.3763/2010, who is also the petitioner in WP(C) No.6378/2010, bef ore this Court in WP(C) No.1779/2010 which writ petition was disposed of on 22.0 3.2010 by a Single Bench of this Court directing the Registrar of Cooperative So cieties to rehear the appeal and to decide the same within a period of 30 days f rom the date of receipt of the certified copy, after giving notice to all the el ected members. 13. The records produced by Mr. Soren, learned State counsel contains a copy of the notice dated 21.04.2008 signed by the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Soc ieties and addressed to the petitioners in WP(C) Nos.3201/2010 and 3763/2010 i.e . the Chairman and Vice Chairman and all the elected members of the society, who were elected in the proceeding dated 28.01.2010. The said record, however, does not disclose as to whether such notices were in fact issued and served on the p etitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010. There is no dispute that such notices were ser ved on the petitioners in WP(C) No.3763/2010 and they have also participated in the hearing before the Registrar on the date fixed i.e. on 28.04.2010. 14. The petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010 are the members elected in the Ann ual General Meeting of the society on 28.01.2010, whose election was also under challenge in the proceeding filed by the private respondents before the Registra r of Cooperative Societies under Section 80 of the Act. They being the elected m embers, whose election has been approved by the approving authority on 01.02.201 0, they have a right to object to the prayer of the private respondents made in the appeal for setting aside their election. Such appeal cannot be heard and dis posed of by the Registrar without issuing any notice to all the elected members. If such course of action is taken, it would amounts to violation of principle o f natural justice. By order dated 22.03.2010 passed in WP(C) No.1779/2010 the Re gistrar was also directed to hear the appeal after issuing notice to all the ele cted members. 15. As discussed above, the records do not reveal the issuance and service o f notice of the appeal to the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010, who are elected members. That being the position, the order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Regi strar of Cooperative Societies in so far as the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/201 0, has to be set aside, which I accordingly do. 16. The next question, which requires consideration is whether the order dat ed 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar can be set aside in part i.e. in so far as the petitioners in WP(C) No.3201/2010 only, on the ground of violation of princ iple of natural justice. The appeal was preferred by the private respondents und er Section 80 of the Act challenging the election on the ground of non-preparati on and non-publication of correct voters list. In the event only WP(C) No.3201/2 010 is allowed by dismissing WP(C) No.3763/2010 it may leads to an anomalous sit uation, as it may be that the Registrar may while reconsidering the appeal decid es to dismiss the same by holding that proper voters list was prepared and publi shed. Moreover, the Registrar while passing the impugned order dated 21.05.2010 did not take into consideration the report of the Returning Officer dated 29.01. 2010 and the approval of the voters list by the Assistant Registrar of Cooperati ve Societies on 24.12.2009. 17. In view of the aforesaid position, the order dated 21.05.2010 passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies is set aside. The matter is remitted to t he Registrar for fresh consideration and disposal by a speaking order, which sha ll be done within a period of 2(two) months from the date of appearance of the p arties. The elected President, Vice President, the members of the society as wel l as the private respondents, who are the appellants before the Registrar and th e Returning Officer and also the Secretary of the Society apart from the Assista nt Registrar of Cooperative Societies are directed to appear before the Registra r on 01.02.2011, on which date the Registrar shall fix a date for hearing of the appeal. While doing so, the Registrar shall also obtain the records from the co ncerned authority and shall also consider the submissions of Mr. Goswami, learne d Sr. counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.3763/2010 as recorded above. 18. The next question which requires consideration by this Court is who woul d, in the meantime, manage the affairs of the society. It appears that the elect ion of the society held on 28.01.2010 was set aside initially by the Registrar o n 11.03.2010. The Registrar, thereafter, vide order dated 17.03.2010 appointed o ne officer of the Cooperative Department to manage the affairs of the society, w hich was however superseded by another order dated 19.06.2010, whereby and where under Sri Anowar Hussain, a Senior Inspector of Cooperative Societies was appoin ted as one man ad-hoc committee to manage the affairs of the said society. Since the Registrar of Cooperative Societies by the order dated 21.05.2010 has again set aside the proceeding of the election dated 28.01.2010 and the one man ad-hoc committee has already been appointed, it is directed that till the appeal is he ard and disposed of by the Registrar, the one man ad-hoc committee appointed by the Joint Registrar vide order dated 19.06.2010 shall continue to manage the aff airs of the society. The said one man ad-hoc committee however shall not take an y steps, till disposal of the appeal by the Registrar, for the purpose of holdin g the election of the society. Such a course of action would not be contrary to the interim order dated 11.06.2010 passed in WP(C) No.3201/2010, as by that orde r it was directed to maintain status quo. As discussed above, vide order dated 1 7.03.2010 one man ad-hoc committee was already appointed by the Registrar before passing of the said order dated 11.06.2010, which however was superseded by the subsequent order dated 19.06.2010. That being the situation, one man ad-hoc com mittee appointed on 19.06.2010 shall continue to discharge his duties and respon sibilities till the appeal is heard and disposed of. For those reasons the resol ution adopted on 26.11.2010 which is under challenge in WP(C) No.6378/2010, cann ot be interfered with. 19. WP(C) No.3201/2010 is accordingly allowed. WP(C) No.3763/2010 stands dis posed of. WP(C) No.6378/2010 stands dismissed. No cost.