- (1.) The first respondent has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this writ petition.
(2.) It is argued that the first respondent being a co-operative society within the meaning of provisions of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 1984, is not a state or authority against whom a writ petition can be moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In support of the contention a Division Bench decision of the Delhi High Court in National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. Nafed Processed Food Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Employees Union & Ors., reported at 2001 (58) DRJ 799, has been cited.
(3.) The case of the first petitioner is this. It obtained orders for export of rice to Bangladesh. Rice to be exported was to be collected from FCI. For execution of the work it entered into an agreement with the first respondent. In terms of the agreement the first respondent was to act on its behalf. According to existing terms and conditions freight borne by the exporter was to be refunded by FCI. The refund was to be made to the first respondent. In connection with some of the contracts the collected amounts were paid to the first petitioner, but in connection with the contract in question a sum of around rupees twenty-three lakh, supposed to have been collected by the first respondent, was not paid. Making allegations to such effect, the first petitioner wrote a letter to which the first respondent did not respond.These are the facts which led to the filing of the present writ petition.;