K.N.Singh, J. - (1.) This petition has been filed jointly by two petitioners. The petitioner No. 1 is the Branch Manager while the petitioner No. 2 is the Assistant Branch Manager of the Kendriya Upbhokta Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Ghazipur, a Cooperative Society, registered under the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. It appears that while the petitioners were posted at the cloth shop run by the Cooperative Society, the Secretary lodged a first information report with the police in February, 1973 alleging that theft had taken place as a result of which the Cooperative Society had been put to a loss of Rs. 13,273 89. The police after investigation of the case, submitted a final report, as in its opinion no theft had been committed in the shop; instead the employees of the Cooperative Society had misappropriated the goods. The Secretary of the Society, thereafter, asked for the petitioners explanation as to why they should not be held responsible for the loss. The Secretary, further, in his another letter directed the petitioners to challenge the police report and in case of their failure, they would be responsible to make good the loss to the society. On 25-10-1975 the Secretary of the Society served a notice on the petitioners directing them to challenge the police report in a Court of law and to get a judgment holding them to be innocent or to deposit the amount of loss. Aggrieved, the petitioners have challenged the notice dated 25-10-1975 by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the affidavits it is apparent that no enquiry has yet been made by the Society to fix the responsibility of the loss on the petitioners. It appears that the Secretary of the Society is proceeding on the presumption that the police has expressed its opinion that the employees were responsible for the toss, and, therefore, the petitioners were liable to make good the loss. The police report, is, however, not final in the matter. It is well settled that the investigation made by the police is preliminary in nature, no such action, as is taken against the petitioners, on the basis of the police report, can be taken by the departmental authorities without holding further enquiry in the matter. It is open to the officers of the respondent society to hold an enquiry and fix the responsibility of the loss and only thereafter the money can be realised. The principle of the natural justice require that the petitioners should be given opportunity of defence.
(3.) In the result, we allow the petition and direct that no recovery shall be made from the petitioners unless a full-fledged enquiry is held and the petitioners are given opportunity of defence. The petitioners are entitled to their costs. Petition allowed.;