The High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2024 12:16:23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.17695 OF 2011 General Manager (Finance), SAIL, Kolkata and others …. Petitioners Mr. Bijoy Dasmohapatra, Advocate -versus- The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar and others …. Opp. Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Amiya Kumar Mishra, Additional Government Advocate (For Opp. Party Nos.1 & 2) None (For Opp. Party No.3) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA Order No. 4. 1.
Decision
ORDER 14.05.2024 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 18th April, 2009 (Annexure-4) passed by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Marketing), Odisha, Bhubaneswar in Dispute Case No.269 of 2007 and order dated 31st July, 2010 (Annexure-6) passed by the Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in Revision Case No.14 of 2009, whereby the petition filed by the Petitioner with regard to maintainability of the dispute case as against it, has been rejected. 3. Mr. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that employees of Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL), Raw Materials Division (RMD) had taken loan from the Adarsha Consumer Co-operative Society Ltd., Rourkela-Opposite Party No.3. The Manager (Personnel) of SAIL, RMD had undertaken Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2024 12:16:23 to deduct the monthly installment of employees towards EMIs of // 2 // the loan and deposit it with the Opposite Party No.3-Society. It is alleged that the members of the Society, who had taken loan did not repay the same, for which the Opposite Party No.3 initiated Dispute Case No. 269 of 2007. The Petitioner being a party to the said proceeding, filed its written statement and objection to delete its name as it is neither a surety to the loan amount nor the Petitioner has any role in recovery of the loan amount from the employees, who had taken the loan. The said application was rejected by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Marketing), Bhubaneswar vide its order dated 18th April, 2009 under Annexure-4 holding that the Petitioner acted as a guarantor/surety to the loan granted by the Society to its members by virtue of a memorandum of understanding executed by the Society and as per the said MOU executed on 22nd March, 2000, the Petitioner is a necessary party to the proceeding. The Joint Registrar therefore held that the dispute case is maintainable as against the Petitioner in view of the provision under Section 68(1)(c) of the Odisha Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 and also directed to implead the principal borrowers as parties to the dispute case and to take out notice on them by paper publication. Assailing the same, the Petitioner preferred two revision cases, namely, Revision Case Nos.12 & 15 of 2009 before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar. Both the revision cases were disposed of by a common order dated 31st July, 2010 under Annexure-6 modifying the impugned order under Annexure-4 to the extent that the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Marketing), Page 2 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2024 12:16:23 Bhubaneswar should issue notice as per the provision of Rule // 3 // 150 of the Odisha Cooperative Societies Rule, 1965 before proceeding for paper publication. Being aggrieved, this writ petition has been filed. 4. Mr. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Petitioner never stood as a guarantor to the loan granted by the Opposite Party No.3-Society in favour of the employees of the SAIL, RMD. The Petitioner was also not a signatory to the MOU referred to by the Joint Registrar in the impugned order under Annexure-4. These aspects were not taken into consideration in the impugned orders under Annexures-4 and 6. Hence, both the orders being not sustainable are liable to be set aside. 5. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate, on instruction, submits that Dispute Case No. 269 of 2007 is at present pending before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sundargarh awaiting decision of this Court. 7. None appears for the Opposite Party No.3 although it is represented through learned counsel. 8. This Court while issuing notice in the matter vide its order dated 12th July, 2011 passed in Misc. Case No.9910 of 2011 directed that Dispute Case No. 269 of 2007 then pending before the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Marketing), Odisha, Bhubaneswar may continue against the loanees, but it shall not continue as against the present petitioner till the next date. The said order is continue till date. 9. Taking note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the interim order dated 12th July, 2011, this Page 3 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2024 12:16:23 Court feels that Dispute Case No.269 of 2007 stated to have // 4 // been pending before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sundargarh should be disposed of at the earliest. It is submitted by Mr. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner that written statement has already been filed in the dispute case by the Petitioner. In that view of the matter, no fruitful purpose will be served by delving into the merit of the order passed under Annexures-4 and 6 at this stage. 10. Accordingly, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction that the Petitioner may raise the issue of maintainability of the dispute case against it before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sundargarh and in that event, the issue of maintainability of the dispute case as against the Petitioner shall be taken up along with other issues at the time of final adjudication of the dispute case without being influenced by the observations made in the order passed under Annexures- 4 and 6. The rest part of the order passed under Annexures-4 and 6 with regard to issuance of notice to the principal loanees stand confirmed. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ms (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge Page 4 of 4