Case: Achutyanand Singh &amp; Another Vs. State of Bihar &amp; Others

1. The petitioners in this petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution are Achutyanand Singh and the Kaithawalia Cane GrowersCooperativeSociety registered under the Bihar and OrissaCooperativeSocieties Act, 1935. Petitioner No. 1 is the Secretary of Petitioner No. 2, theCooperativeSociety. The facts necessary for the disposal of this writ petition lie in a very narrow compass and are not disputed. We consider it unnecessary for our present purpose to refer to the earlier events including the correspondence between theCooperativeDepartment and the petitioners in the background of which the impugned order dated January 22, 1968 was made, because they have no material bearing on the question of the invalidity of the impugned order2. Ignoring therefore the earlier history of the controversy between the Cane Growers,CooperativeSocieties and the Government Department ofCooperativeSocieties relating to the amalgamation of the Cane GrowersCooperativeSocieties into MultipurposeCooperativeSocieties, we need only begin with the order dated November 25, 1967 passed by the Assistant Registrar,CooperativeSocieties, Bettiah directing the petitioner society to take steps for amalgamation of the petitioner society with the othere societies mentioned therein. Against this order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner on December 14, 1967, with the Registirar,CooperativeSocieties (Bihar) at Patna, under R. 39 (4) of the Bihar and OrissaCooperativeSocieties Rules, 1959. While this appeal was pending, the Assistant Registrar,CooperativeSocieties, passed another order on January 22, 1968, by means of which he compulsorily amalgamated the petitioner Society with three other societies mentioned therein so as to form a new MultipurposeCooperativeSociety. It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition was presented in this Court on August 10, 1968, challenging the two orders of the Assistant Registrar. The impugned order dated January 22, 1968 reads as under:"Chanpatia Community Development Block. Name of Societies to be amalgamated.:1. Bankat Kaithwalia M. P. C. S2. Bankat C. G. C. S3. Kaithwalia C. G. C. S4. Shambhnapur C. G. C. SWhereas the above noted societies which have been functioning independently are extremely weak, both structurally and financially, to attain a viable status so as to deliver the goods expected from them until and unless they are amalgamated to form a new society and whereas the managing committee of the above noted societies have failed to convene a meeting in compliance to my order No. 49A dated7 issued under Section 39 (1) of the BiharCooperativeSocieties Rules, 1959, while the Society/Societies mentioned against serial.. . . above convened a meeting ofs and creditors thereof which took no decision which is not in the interest of these societies and whereas six weeks have expired from the date of my orders referred to above, I, after satisfying myself that the interest of the creditors have been adequately safeguarded direct unders (2) and (3) of Rule 39 of the Bihar and OrissaCooperativeSocieties Rules, 1959 that the aforesaid societies should be amalgamated into a new society, namely, Bankat Kaithwalia M. P. C. S. Society. and I hereby register the new society and theIt is further ordered that the assets and liabilities of the amalgamated societies shall vest in the new society and the registration of the amalgamating societies shall stand cancelled."

Court's reasoning:
5. Before considering the merits of this contention, we consider it proper to refer to tome of the statutory provisions. The Bihar and OrissaCooperativeSocieties Act (No. VI of 1935) was enacted in May 1935 to consolidate and amend the law relating toCooperativeSocieties in the State of Bihar and Orissa. Under S. 6 (1) the State Government is empowered to appoint a person to be a Registrar ofCooperativeSocieties for the State or any portion of it, and also to appoint persons to assist such Registrar. Under"The State Government may, by general or special order published in the Official Gazette, confer,(a) on any person appointed undern (1), to assist the Registrar, all or any of the powers of the Registrar under this Act except the powers under section 26, and(b) x x x x "It is obvious that the powers of a Registrar can be conferred on a person appointed under S. 6 (1) by means of a general or special order published in the Official Gazette. As the notification in the present case was published in the Official Gazette on May 1, 1968, the order conferring the Registrars power on the Assistant Registrar mentioned therein could not be operative before that date and no valid order under R. 39 could be made by any such Assistant Registrar prior to that date6. The next relevant statutory provision is R: 39 of the BiharCooperativeSocieties Rules, 1959 made under S. 66 of the Act. This rule has already been set out. It is clear that so long as the appeal remains pending with the Registrar or the State Government, as the case may be, no order can made undere (2).It is not disputed before us that the petitioner society had appealed from the order of the Assistant Registrar dated November, 25, 1967 to the Registrar and that on January 22, 1968 that appeal was pending. Indeed it is still pending awaiting disposal. In view of the fact that on January 22, 1968, when the order under R. 39 (2) was made by the Assistant Registrar, the appeal against the order dated November 25, 1967, was pending with the Registrar, the order dated January 22, 1968, must be held to be contrary to law and therefore void. Once this order is struck down the challenge to the order dated November 25, 1967 will have to be decided by the Registrar before whom the appeal from that order is pending and we do not consider it either necessary or proper to express any opinion on that point7. The third contention also stands accepted because the news were enforced by means of the order dated January 22, 1968, and if that order is struck down the news would fall with it.