- (1.) Dhandoli Kalan Co-operative Agricultural Service Society No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as Society) became defaulter and was brought under liquidation. Shri Bhag Singh Ganger was appointed as a liquidator and he vide order dated 9.12.1972, duly endorsed by Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sangrur, on 14.12.1972 exercising the powers of Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab, order Major Singh and Sakinder Singh petitioners and Harminder Singh and Joginder Singh, respondents Nos. 4 and 5, respectively, to pay Rs. 6,82,825/- as debts and liquidation expenses as members and Secretary towards the assets of the Society. Major Singh and Sakinder Singh petitioners filed an appeal against the order dated 14.12.1972 before the State of Punjab through Deputy Secretary, Co-operative Department, alleging the same to be illegal, without jurisdiction, void and against the principles of natural justice and equity. Their main grounds are that they were not given an opportunity to defend themselves before fixing the liability against them and requiring them to make payment of the entire amount of Rs. 6,82,825/0 and that the order of declining to entertain the appeal was wrong because under law an appeal against the order of the Registrar lies to the Government.
(2.) The Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sangrur, respondent No. 2 filed his affidavit stating that notices to both the petitioners, Sh. Harminder Singh respondent No. 4 and Joginder Singh, respondent No. 5 were issued by the liquidator under registered covers on 16.11.1972, that Sikander Singh petitioner and respondent No. 4 refused to receive the notices and that Shri Joginder Singh, respondent No. 5 accepted the service of the notice. No comments were given regarding respondent No. 1 having declined to entertain the appeal wrongly for lack of jurisdiction.
(3.) Sikander Singh petitioner in his affidavit stated that the petitioners were never a party to the winding up process or in the liquidation proceedings and were never issued any notices nor were given any opportunity to defend at any stage. Even if the replay filed by respondent No. 2 be accepted as correct, it is not established that Major Singh petitioner received any notice from the liquidator before the order, copy of which is annexure B, was passed by him. The proceedings for determining liability of each member of the Society to pay are quasi judicial in nature and therefore, it is incumbent upon the liquidator to issue notices to the members of the Society to show cause as to why they should not be held liable. In Tara Chand and others V/s. The State of Haryana and others,1972 PunLR 376it has been held :- "that since the liability to pay of each member has to be determined, the proceedings for determination are quasi-judicial in nature and it is incumbent upon the liquidator to issue a notice to the members to show cause why they should not be saddled with the liability proposed. If the member does not object, the liability can be fastened on him, but if he raises an objection that objection has to be gone into and decided. It is not permissible to the liquidator to pass an order of contribution against a member without issuing such a notice to him.";