M.R.Sharma, J. - (1.) The petitioner is a Co-operative Society registered under the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act). In exercise of powers under Section 84-A of the Act, the Registrar Co-operative Societies, Haryana, Chandigarh, directed the Apex Society respondent No. 3 to frame Common Cadre Rules applicable to some of the categories of servants of its member societies, including the petitioner-Society. Respondent No. 3 consequently framed the Primary Co-operative Agricultural Credit/Service Societies, Secretaries Common Cadre Rules, 1973, which were later on replaced by the Haryana State Central Co-operative Bank Staff Service (Common Cadre) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter called the Rules). It is alleged that these Rules infringed upon the statutory rights of the Primary Co-operative Societies conferred on them under Section 23 (1) of the Act, which lays down that final authority in a cooperative society shall vest in the general body of the members and where the bye-laws of such a society provide the constitution of a smaller body, such authority shall vest in the smaller body consisting of the delegate members of the society.
(2.) The other ground of challenge is that the Legislature has not provided sufficient guidelines in Section 84-A of the Act to the apex societies to frame the requisite rules. The petitioner-Society has urged that it is highly satisfied with the services rendered by the Secretary appointed by it about five years back whom it wants to retain even now and because of the Common Cadre Rules it may be forced to dispense with his services.
(3.) This petition and certain other such petitions came up for hearing before my learned brother Dhillon, J., on November 7, 1975. It was argued before him that the provisions of Section 84-A run counter to the provisions of Section 23 and Section 85 (2) (xxxviii) of the Act. My learned brother was of the view that the question involved was of considerable importance affecting a large number of employees of the various societies, and for this reason he recommended that the case be decided by a larger Bench. This is how, this reference has come up before us for decision.;