S.S. Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) A challenge to the constitutionality of the power of compulsory amalgamation of societies vested in the Registrar of Cooperative Societies recently by Sub -sections (8), (9), (10), (11) and (12) of Section 13 of the Punjab Co -operative Societies Act (by Punjab Act No. 8 of 1978) has necessitated this reference to the Full Bench in this set of four connected writ petitions.
(2.) AS is manifest, the aforesaid issue as also some ancillary ones to which reference would follow hereinafter are pristinely legal and, therefore, a brief reference to the facts in Civil Writ Petition No. 3992 of 1978 would suffice. The 113 writ -Petitioners therein claim to be the members of the Behbalpur Co -operative Agricultural Service society which is duly registered under the Punjab Co -operative societies Act and is averred to have in all about 360 members. It is the claim of me Petitioners that the Society aforesaid has a sound financial position and was, therefore, both administratively and financially viable and able to provide the essential services to its members. However, alter the recent additions of sub -sections (8) to (12) of Section 13 of the Punjab Co -operative Societies Act, the Assistant Registrar of Co -operative Societies, exercising the powers of the Registrar had passed the impugned; proposed order, Annexure P -1, under the aforesaid provisions, directing the amalgamation of the Behbalpur Co -operative Agricultural Service Society along with the Kot Fatuhi Co -operative Agricultural Service Society and the Kotla Co -operative Agricultural Service Society Limited with the principal Society of the Thinda Co -operative Agricultural Service Society. It has been stated in the aforesaid impugned order that the Assistant Registrar after due consideration of the financial position and working condition of the aforesaid societies had come to the conclusion that they were not financially or administratively viable units and had failed to provide essential services to their members and, therefore, it would be in the interest of the amalgamating societies to amalgamate with the principal society, so that the latter can function thereafter as a sound viable financial and administrative unit. Alter specifying the conditions in the proposed order, a notice had been served on the amalgamating societies and the principal society as also their creditors that if any society or any creditor of such society or societies has objections to such amalgamation, they may file the same before the 16th of September, 1978. Similar, if not identical orders have been passed by the respective Assistant Registrars with regard to the other co -operative societies and aggrieved thereby, the Petitioners have preferred these writ petitions. Here I come to the material provisions of sub -sections (8) to (12) of Section 13, which are under challenge, it is necessary to recall, albeit briefly, the legislative history preceding their enactment. Section 13 deals with the amalgamation, transfer of assets and liabilities, and division of co -operative societies. Sub -sections (1) to (7), which already existed on the Statute Book, provided for a voluntary amalgamation or division of co -operative societies conditional on the passing of a resolution by the two -third majority of the members present and voting subject to the previous approval of the Registrar. The necessary procedural details for effecting such voluntary amalgamation or division of co -operative societies were spelled out in Sub -section (1) to (7) of Section 13, it may be highlighted that the Punjab Co -operative Societies Act, 1961, continues to be in force in fact in both the States of Punjab and Haryana. By the Haryana Act No. 13 of 1971, Sub -sections (8) to (12) were added to Section 13 as applicable to Haryana providing for what may be conveniently called the compulsory amalgamation or division of the societies on the satisfaction of the Registrar. It is not disputed at the bar that the aforesaid provisions thereby vesting the power of amalgamation in the Registrar, if not in pari materia with the provisions of the Punjab Act No. 8 of 1978, which are under challenge are at least very intimately analogous thereto. The Haryana amendment was made the subject -matter of challenge during the continuance of the emergency and the limited constitutional challenge that was then available in view of the suspension of the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution was repelled by the Division Bench in The Amerheri Co -operative Agricultural Service Society, Amerheri and Anr v. The State of Haryana and Ors., 1976 P.L.J. 302.
(3.) MR . B.S. Khoji, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, in all these writ petitions has laid no challenge to the correctness of the said judgment and indeed has placed substantial reliance therein. The primary contention in this context raised by him is that after the lifting of the emergency he is now entitled to challenge the analogous, if not identical, provisions' of Sub -sections (8) to (12) added to Section 13 by the Punjab Act No. 8 of 1978 on the basis of Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution of India. Counsel was, however, fair enough to concede forthwith that he was unable to press any attack on the basis of Article 31 and wished to confine his argument resting on Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution only.;