Pritam Pal, J. - (1.) ONE post of Accounts Officer was advertised by the first Respondent - -the Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co -operative Wholesale Stores, Ltd., Chandigarh, on June 10, 1979, to be filled by direct recruitment. A number of candidates applied for the same. After interviewing the candidates the Board of Directors initially selected one Shri S.K. Narwania but he refused to join. Thereafter, one Shri V.K. Bountra was selected but he too decided not to take up this post Eventually the second Respondent - -Avtar Singh was appointed from the waiting list. He did not fulfill the requisite qualifications but the Registrar, Co -operative Societies, granted relaxation in respect thereof. The appointment of Avtar Singh has been challenged in this writ petition by Subash Chander Jain who was one of the candidates for this post but was not selected. The grounds of challenge are two hold. Firstly, that the Respondent Avtar Singh was not qualified for appointment and secondly, that the post of Accounts Officer belonged to the quota of promotees and so it could not be filled by direct recruitment.
(2.) AT the very outset it is objected by the learned Respondents' counsel that the writ petition is not maintainable because that Respondent -Society is not a statutory body or a public authority envisaged under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In support of this contention a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Ajmer Singh v. The Registrar Co -operative Societies' Punjab Chandigarh and Ors. : A.I.R. 1981 P&H 107 it was held that a Co -operative Society being a nonstatutory body a writ petition against it is not maintainable. Placing implicit reliance on this judgment the learned Counsel contended that the Respondent -Society being merely registered under the Co -operative Societies Act is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
(3.) THE learned Petitioner's counsel on the other hand placed reliance on an earlier Division Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwant Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors., 1972 P.L.J. 399, wherein it was held that writ is maintainable against a Co -operative Society if there is a failure to carry, out the duties placed on it by a statute. This judgment is based on a decision of the Supreme Court in Praga Tools Corporation v. C.V. Imanual and Ors. : A.I.R. 1969 S.C. 1306 wherein it was held: It is well understood that a mandamus lies to secure the performance of a public or statutory duty in the performance of which the one who allies for it has a sufficient legal interest. The pertinent observations of the Supreme Count in this judgment are as follows: Therefore, the condition precedent for the issue of mandamus is that there is in one claiming it a legal sight to the performance of a legal duty by one against whom it is sought An order of mandamus is, in form, a command directed to. a person, corporation or an inferior tribunal requiring him or them to do a particular thing therein specified which appertains to his or their office and is in the nature of a public duty. It is, however, not necessary that the person or the authority on whom the statute duty is imposed need be a public official or an official body. A mandamus can issue, for instance, to. an official of a society to compel him to carry out the terms of the statute. under or by which the society is constituted or governed and also to companies or corporations to carry out duties placed on them by the statutes authorizing their undertakings.;