V M R MALAIPERUMAL PILLAI Vs. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two applications for the issue of a writ of certiorari and a writ of prohibition respectively and relate to certain proceedings commenced by the Triplicane Metal Workers' Co-operative Production and Sales Society in the following circumstances. The petitioner in the two petitions was the President of the Society. On 27th June 1947, the Society represented by its President filed before the Deputy Registrar, of Co-operative Societies, Madras, a claim for Rs. 8963-5-7 alleged to be due and owing to the Society by the petitioner. This claim was apparently made under Section 61, Madras Co-operative Societies Act, Act VI [6] of 1932, Sub-section (1) of which says that if any dispute touching the business of a registered society arises inter alia between the society and its officers, past and present, such dispute shall be referred to the Registrar for decision.

(2.) Now, what should have happened under the provisions of Section 51 (2) read with Rule 15 of the Rules made under the Act, was, the Registrar should, on receipt of such a reference, have decided to do one of three things, namely, (1) to decide the dispute himself, or (2) to transfer it for disposal to any person who has been invested by the Local Government with powers in that behalf or Page 1 of 3 V.M.R. Malaiperumal Pillai vs. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies and O... (3) subject to such rules as may be prescribed, to refer it for disposal to an arbitrator or arbitrators. The rules prescribe that where on receipt of a reference under Sub-rule (1) the Registrar decides under Clause (c) of Subsection (2) of Section 51 of the Act, to refer it for decision by arbitration, a reference shall be made either to a single arbitrator appointed by the Registrar or to a body of arbitrators of whom one shall be nominated by the Registrar and one by each of the parties to the dispute.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the provisions of the Act have not been substantially complied with in the course of the proceedings commenced as aforementioned. Two contentions were raised on his behalf. The first is that the Registrar referred to in Section 51 (1) and Section 51 (2) of the Act is the person appointed to perform all the duties of a Registrar of Cooperative Societies under the Act, and reliance was placed for this contention on the definition of "Registrar" in Section 2 (g) of the Act. Section 3 of the Act empowers the Local Government to appoint a person to be Registrar of Co. operative Societies for the Presidency of Madras, and also empowers it, by general or special order, to confer on any other parsons all or any of the powers of a Registrar under the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a person appointed under this provision on whom some of the powers of a Registrar are conferred by the Provincial Government will not be a person who can be deemed to be a Registrar within the meaning of the definition in Section 2 (g), because, according to him, it is only when a person is appointed to perform all the duties of a Registrar that he can be deemed to be a Registrar within the meaning of that definition.