- (1.) The petitioner, who was working as a Secretary in the Sehjomajra Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Sehjomajra, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana - respondent No.5 (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent Society'), has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the Award dated 21.9.2004 (Annexure P-3), passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Samrala, District Ludhiana (respondent No.4 herein), whereby on an arbitration claim petition under Sections 55 and 56 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the respondent Society was permitted to recover the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- along with interest from the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought for quashing of the orders dated 3.5.2005 (Annexure P-4) and 4.10.2006 (Annexure P-6), passed by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Ludhiana (respondent No.3 herein) and the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh (respondent No.2 herein), respectively, whereby the appeal and revision filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid award dated 21.9.2004 were dismissed.
(2.) The petitioner has impugned the aforesaid orders on the following two grounds : (a) That no claim petition was filed strictly in accordance with 51 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Rules, 1963 and Appendix F appended to the Rules. Therefore, no Award could have been passed against the petitioner, as the same amounts to denial of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Thus, the impugned Award passed against the petitioner is in violation of the principles of natural justice and the same cannot be sustained. (b) That the respondent Society passed a resolution dated 5.10.2002, copy of which has been attached with the petition as Annexure P-2, according to which it was resolved that the disputed amount of Rs.1,90,000/- was given by the petitioner to Balwinder Singh (respondent No. 6 herein) for purchase of manure and other necessary articles and the said amount has not been re-paid by Balwinder Singh, therefore, the same be recovered from him. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent Society, while referring the dispute regarding recovery of the said amount from the petitioner, did not take care of its own resolution and even the Assistant Registrar, while deciding the arbitration reference, has not taken into consideration the said resolution, passed by the respondent Society, and illegally passed the impugned Award permitting the respondent Society to recover the said amount from the petitioner.
(3.) We have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned orders as well as the writ petition and the separate written statements filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4, the respondent Society and respondent No.6.;