Partly allowed

The Grain Merchants v. the Joint Registrar of

Karnataka HC3 Dec 2024WP/2516/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, while dismissing a petition seeking to quash an order dismissing an appeal, directed the Registrar to allow cross-examination and lead of additional evidence. The Court noted the decade-long pendency and directed swift disposal of the pending enquiry.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed. The Registrar was directed to permit all parties to lead additional evidence and cross-examine witnesses, and to issue notices by 26.12.2024 to expedite the enquiry.

The Grain Merchants Vs the Joint Registrar of — Cooperative Societies | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:49858 WP No. 2516 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 2516 OF 2015 (CS-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

THE GRAIN MERCHANTS, CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NO.2, PAMPAMAHAKAVI ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALURU - 18.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. SANDESH T B.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BANGALORE REGION, BANGALORE - 52.

¶13

THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, ALIASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 52.

¶14

SRI.M.V.MURALIDHAR

¶15

NO.35, B-3, THRIPURANEST, 11TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:49858 WP No. 2516 of 2015

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.YOGESH.D.NAIK., AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI.MOHAN BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER VIDE ANNEX-G DISMISSING THE APPEAL NO.RCS/DAP/D1/7-2010-11 DTD.7.1.2012 PASSED BY R- 2.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION OF ORDER PASSED BY R-2 AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN "B" GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

1. Petitioner-Society is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶25

i. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order vide Annexure-G dismissing the appeal no. RCS/DAP/D1/7- 2010-11 dated 7.1.2012 passed by respondent no.2.

¶26

ii. Issue such other writ or direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶27

The grievance of the petitioner in the present proceeding is that though adequate opportunity had been granted to respondent No.3 to lead evidence and cross-examine the witnesses, respondent No.3

¶28

has not availed the said opportunity, and as such the

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:49858 WP No. 2516 of 2015

¶30

impugned order passed by respondent No.1 in allowing the appeal in RCS/DAP/D1/7-2010-11 vide order dated 07.01.2012 on the ground that the enquiry officer has not given opportunity to crossexamine is not correct and as such the said order is required to be set aside.

¶31

The genesis of the proceedings is the report by the Reserve Bank of India as regards certain of the irregularities committed by the petitioner and its officers. The matter has been referred to the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies for enquiry. Enquiry was made as regards 13 points. Subsequently, additional points have included totally making it 28 points and proceed with.

¶32

On the face of the record, it appears to me that the delay is being caused by the Society so that the enquiry as regards the 28 points is not completed and the matter does not get to its logical conclusion.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:49858 WP No. 2516 of 2015

¶35

Inasmuch as the present matter is pending for nearly ten years, the order passed by respondent No.1 was way back on 07.01.2012, thus effectively putting at a standstill the enquiry against the petitioner-society and its officers as regards 28 points.

¶36

The present petition and the earlier appeal had also appeared to be filed only to delay the proceedings. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i) The writ petition is dismissed, since vide order dated 07.01.2012, respondent No.3 was granted an opportunity to cross-examine the concerned witnesses. There being a long time gap between that order and now, I am of the considered opinion that opportunity would be required to be granted to all the parties to lead additional evidence and cross-examine the witnesses.

¶39

ii) Respondent No.2 is directed to permit all the concerned to lead any further evidence and cross-examine the witnesses.

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:49858 WP No. 2516 of 2015

¶42

iii) Respondent No.2 is directed to issue notice to all the concerned parties calling upon them to appear before him at the earliest possible date.

¶43

iv) The notice at any rate to be issued on or before 26.12.2024.

¶44

v) Once the notice is served, respondent No.2 is directed to consider the matter as expeditiously as possible, if possible on a day-to-day basis, considering that the matter is of the year 2007 is still pending and the concerned have taken advantage of the above pendency for the last nearly ten years to delay the enquiry.

¶45

vi) Respondent No.3 is permitted to cross-examine the concerned witnesses on the date so fixed. It is made clear that if respondent No.3 is not to exercise that option, then he will not be entitled to the benefit which has been provided under this order.

¶46

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶47

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

The Grain Merchants v. the Joint Registrar of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Grain Merchants v. the Joint Registrar of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Jaideep Singh Vs the Registrar (Evaluation)

Margadarshan Education Trust Vs the Registrar

Sri. Girish Babu .M, Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Smt Rukmini Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Sri Mahaganapathi Souharda Pathina Sahakari Niyamita Vs the State of Karnataka

The Bapuji Co-Operative Housing Society Vs the State of Karnataka