- (1.) This is an application for the issue of a Writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh (Food and Agriculture Department) in its Memorandum No. 3351 Co-op/VI/65-7 dated 19th April, 1966 confirming the decision of the Regional Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kakinada in R.P. No. 4/65-B 3 dated 14th September, 1965, under the following circumstances : The petitioner is a Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank which is newly formed at Bheemunipatnam, Vizag district. Previous to its formation, the Bheemunipatnam area was being served by the Vizianagaram Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Ltd., Vizianagaram (6th respondent herein). On an application under section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societ'es, after due consideration of all the relevant factors, passed an order dated 31st December, 1964 in Re. No. 6039/62 B under section 7 of the Act registering the petitioner-society ?.s the Land Mortgage Bank at Bheemunipatnam with its area of operation confined to Bheemunipatnam taluk. Aggrieved by this order of registration of the petitkner-society, the Vizianagaram Co-operative Lard Mortgage Bank (6th respondent herein) filed a Revision Petition R.P. 4/65-B3 before the Revisional Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kakinada, challenging the said order of the Deputy Registrar The Joint Registrar cancelled the Deputy Registrar's order of registration of the petitioner- society holding that the registration of the Land Mortgage Bank at Bheemunipatnam which is already covered by the Vizianagaram Land Mortgage Bank is part of its area of operations, that it therefore amounts to a division of the area of operations falling under section 15 of the Act and that the procedure under section 15 of the Act ought to have been followed by the Deputy Registrar. Against this order the petitioner filed a further revision to the Government of Andhra Pradesh which merely dismissed the revision saying that the revision is rejected. Against the said order of the Joint Registrar and the Government's order confirming the same, this Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-society. The main point argued by Sri Venkatapathi Raju, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. Parthasarathi, the learned Counsel appearing for the Co-operative Central Land Mortgage Bank, Hyderabad, (5th respondent herein) in support cf the petition, is that this is not a case falling under section 15 of the Act that this is a case of simple registration of a new society under section 7 of the Act and that the order of cancellation of the registration by the Joint Registrar is not warranted. Sub-section (1) of section 15 of the Act reads as follows :- "15. (1) Where in the opinion of the Registrar, any division or amalgamation of the societies is necessary in the interests of societies or of the co-operative movement, the Registrar shall, after consulting the financing bank to which such societies are indebted call upon the committee of such societies, by notice in writing containing such particulars as may be prescribed and within such time as may be specified in the notice, to so divide, or amalgamate, as the case may be."
(2.) I agree with the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner and the 5th respondent herein because the facts of the case clearly show that this is not a case of division of the existing society at Vizianagaram. It is common ground that no one applied for the division of the existing society. Nor is it a case where the Registrar Started proceedings for division of the Society. It is only when an existing society is sought to be divided that the question of the division of assets and liabilities arise. The main contention of Sri D. V. Reddi Pantulu on behalf of the Vizianagaram Bank is that the Vizianagaram Bank was previously operating in the Bheemunipatnam area and that the petitoner cannot be allowed to operate on the said area.
(3.) There is no provision in the Act or in the Rules to the effect that the Vizianagram Bank or any Bank as such has any right over any particular area. So long as there was no other Bank in the Bheemunipatnam area, the Vizianagaram Bank was operating in the said area. It is within the competence of the Deputy Registrar to separate the Bheemunipatnam area and direct the Vizianagaram Bank to effect any suitable alterations in their bye-laws. There is no question of any monopoly in favour of the Vizianagaram Bank and unless it has got any vested right to operate in the Bheemunipatnam area, the Vizianagaram Bank cannot raise any objection to the formation of a new society in the Bheemunipatnam area. There is no question of any division of the area as held by the Joint Registrar oecause the area cannot be held to be an asset of the Vizianagaram Bank. The language of section 15 of the Act also does not support the contention that a division of the area necessarily amounts to a division of the society itself. Hence, the Joint Registrar is obviously under an error in thinking that when a certain area under the Vizianagaram Bank is allotted to the Bheemunipatnam Bank, it involves the division of the assets.;