Case: Harijan Devabhai Jivabhai Vs. Becharbhai Valabhai Vaniya

3. Learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 11161/2000 passed the order to the effect that if the Liquidator had taken over the charge of the society, then he was directed to proceed further in the matter and protect the interest of the society and submit his report on or before the 10.1.2000. That order was challenged by the respondent by filing the aforesaid LPA.  4. By the impugned order, without deciding the Letters Patent Appeal the High Court has allowed the same and has ignored various orders passed by the concerned authorities in number of petitions filed by the parties. The Court held that if the Liquidator is allowed to take charge of the agricultural land, its yield is bound to suffer because he will not be in a position to till the land with the same zeal as that of the members of thesociety who have been cultivating the land since last 25 years. The Court, therefore, stayed the operation of the interim relief which was granted by the learned Single judge with a clarification that the society should continue to remain in possession of the land in question for cultivation purpose, subject to the outcome of the petition and any orders that might be made during the pendency by the learned Single Judge. Effect isafter the aforesaid order, the Letters Patent Appeal which was filed against the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge would not survive.  5. Chequered facts of the case are that Dr. Ambedkar Samudaik Kheti Sahakari Mandali of Pipali, District Surendranagar is a registered society, registered on 29.3.1975, allegedly having aim and object of upliftment of the schedule tribes through agricultural activities, providing employment and financial assistance to the members of the lower strata of the society. Appellant is a member and respondent No. 1 is Chairman of the Mandali. On 7.7.1977, 184 acres of government land was allotted to the Society on collective basis by the Deputy Collector, Dhangadhra. At the time of inception of the society, there were 24 members as against 27 at present. It is contended that out of the 27 members, 23 belong to one and the same family. The Chairman of the society, respondent No. 1, is alleged to have been running the society since the last more than 25 years. The District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Surendranagar, passed an interim order under Section 107 of the Gujarat Cooperative Society Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and appointedOfficer, as Liquidator and gave opportunity of making representation against the said order to respondent No. 1.  6. Thereafter on 29.5.2000 the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Sundernagar passed a final order under Section 107(3) of the Act, with the direction that the Liquidator should complete the procedure of liquidation within prescribed time.  7. It appears that the order passed by the District Registrar was challenged by filing appeal before the Additional Registrar,(Appeals), Ahmedabad. The authority admitted the appeal but no interim order was passed. Hence, the Society preferred a revision application before the Deputy Secretary,(Appeals), Ahmedabad. In that revision application, the interim relief claimed by respondent No. 1 was refused. That order was challenged by filing Special Civil Application No. 4021 of 1999 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. In that petition it was contended that the Liquidator has taken charge of the Society on 2.6.1999. The learned Single Judge by order dated 21.1.2000 rejected the said petition by observing that against the interim order petition was not required to be entertained and directed the Additional Registrar to decide the appeal within 15 days and in the meantime parties were directed to maintain status quo.  8. Thereafter, by order dated 25.9.2000 the Additional Registrar(Appeals), Ahmedabad set aside the final order dated 29.5.1999 passed by the District Registrar, Sundernagar and directed him to decide the matter afresh after hearing the parties.  9. The appellant has also produced on record number of other orders passed by the High Court in different matters between the parties. One such order is dated 12th March, 2001 passed in Special Criminal Application No. 78 of 2000 filed by the respondent No. 2 wherein after considering the various contentions, the court finally observed that dispute has to be finally resolved by the District Registrar of theand not by the process adopted by the society. The Court also observed that there was interim order to maintain status quo as it existed.

Court's reasoning:
12. In the present case, at present the dispute is pending with the District Registrar. Interim order passed by the District Registrar is in force. Liquidator has taken possession of the land. Therefore, till the disposal of the matter by the District Registrar, it is directed that Liquidator would grant licence to cultivate the land on the terms and conditions which may be fixed by him or on the basis by agency agreement by recovering a stipulated amount to the Society or its members. In any case, sale of the agricultural produce from the land in question should be done under his supervision and control13. With the above directions, the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside. We make it clear that the authorities shall decide the matter on merits without being influenced by any observations made in this order.