Aladangadi Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd. vs Government of Karnataka

Ram Mohan Reddy, J.—This petition though listed for hearing on Interlocutory Application with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties is finally heard and disposed of by this order.

Sri. Deviprasad Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 5th respondent though filed a complaint against the management of the petitioner-society, alleging certain irregularities and sought for a direction to supersede the society, nevertheless after an enquiry the Deputy Registrar of cooperative Societies by order dt. 6.8.2010 accepted the report dt. 6.3.2010 of the Asst. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and declined to supersede the society. According to the learned counsel that order was called in question in W.P. 40553/2010 dt. 25.1.2011 whence a learned Single Judge recorded the submission of the learned AGA that the 5th respondent''s representation would be considered invoking Section 108 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 and orders passed thereon after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties and fixed six months time for compliance. Learned counsel further asserts that the Principal Secretary to Government, Cooperative Department by order dt. 17.12.2011 in Revision Petition No. CO/19/CAP/2011 having considered the 5th respondent''s representation and extended reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, recorded findings of fact that; petitioner-society achieved progress in various activities, earned profits consecutively for a period of three years; the accounts of the society were audited upto 2009-10; a General Body meeting was held during the year 2010-11, and; that it was the duty and responsibility of the Committee to rectify the defects noticed in the audit inspection report; in addition to a finding that some of the irregularities in the petitioner-society are administrative in nature in not complying with instructions which ought to be rectified by the office of the society and accordingly directed the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies to consider the 5th respondent''s petition after affording opportunity of hearing to the committee of the Society and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Learned counsel submits that the direction to reconsider 5th respondent''s representation is unnecessary since the allegations are found to be mere administrative lapses which could be rectified by the Society. Learned counsel further submits that the 5th respondent has no locus standi to maintain a legal proceeding as he is a facilitator.

Learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that being a member of the Society is in law entitled to bring to fore the irregularities and illegalities committed by the Committee of the management and that neither the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act nor Rules disentitles a member to question the irregularities. According to the learned counsel the order impugned is against the direction to reconsider the 5th respondent''s representation after affording opportunity of hearing to the Committee and to pass orders in accordance with law on the lines narrated in the order.

If regard is had to the findings of the Prl. Secretary in the order, Annexure-A, more appropriately over allegations held to be administrative in nature requiring rectification by the society, no exception can be taken to the direction to reconsider the 5th respondent''s representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the Committee of the petitioner-society and pass orders in accordance with law. Needless to state that if rectification of the mistakes as noticed by the Prl. Secretary is not complied with, then the society is answerable.

In the circumstances, the challenge to the order impugned is without merit. Petition is accordingly rejected.

Parties to appear before the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies on 17.6.2014 without further notice.