Gupta. J. - (1.) These three appeals by special leave arise out of three proceedings under Section 68 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) The appellant in all these appeals, Nayagarh Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., is registered as a Co-operative Society under the Act and has among its objects, raising funds for financing cooperative societies registered under the Act affiliated to it, besides carrying on the general business of a bank. Three such co-operative societies had applied to the appellant Bank for loans and on the recommendation of the first respondent in these appeals, who at the relevant time was employed as Secretary of the Bank, various sums were advanced to these cooperative societies:Rs, 61.420 to Krishna Prasad Co-operative Society. Rs. 3.52,490 to Singhapara Co-operative Society and Rs, 1,35,315 to Kaijhar Gram Panchayat Co-operative Grain Golla Credit and Thrift Society. Attempts to recover the loans advanced to the aforesaid societies having failed, the appellant Bank referred the disputes concerning the said transactions to arbitration under Section 68 of the Act praying for an award in each case for the sum advanced with interest:the claim was made in each case against the indebted society, its office-bearers and the first respondent in the appeals before us, jointly and severally.
(3.) The allegations on which the first respondent was made a party to these proceedings under Section 68 of the Act are similar in all the three cases. It was said that: ".,.... It was the responsibility of the Secretary to the Bank to examine the loan application and recommend to the committee for consideration. He has misutilised his power and position of his office and mischievously recommended for sanction of the loan applied by the recalcitrant office bearers of...,.. (these societies). The plaintiff (appellant bank) has got sufficient reasons to believe that the first respondent has also connived with the management of the society in their irregularities and helped them in misappropriation of funds so as to achieve his selfish motive." The first respondent filed three writ petitions before the Orissa High Court for quashing the proceedings against him on the ground that the appellant Bank had no jurisdiction to initiate disputes against him under Section 68 of the Act and also alleged that the said proceedings were mala fide. The High Court found that the allegations against the first respondent could not form the subject-matter of a dispute under Section 68 of the Act, and on this view, quashed the three disputes which were pending before the Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, Khurda Circle Khurda, in so far as they related to the first respondent. The validity of this decision is challenged before us by the appellant Bank.;