ORDER :

1. By this order, we are dealing with the issue of powers which can be conferred on the Court appointed Administrator of Sri. Guru Sarvabouma Souharda Credit Co-operative Limited (for short "the Credit Co-operative").

2. Writ Petition No. 7350/2020 has been filed in public interest for espousing the cause of the investors of Sri. Guru Raghavendra Sahakara Bank Niyamitha (for short "the said Co-operative Bank").

3. Writ Petition No. 8674/2020 is also filed in public interest for espousing the cause of the investors of the said Credit Cooperative. The said Credit Co-operative has been duly registered under Section 4 of the Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act, 1997 (for short "the said Act of 1997"). Various allegations have been made about several financial irregularities, acts of misappropriation, acts of embezzlement of funds and creation of fictitious accounts to the extent of 500.00 Crores on the date of filing of the petition in relation to the said Credit Co-operative. It is pointed out that the said Credit Co-operative has invested an amount of about Rs. 235.00 Crores in the said Co-operative Bank. In respect of the said Credit Co-operative, by exercising the powers under Section 5(1) of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2004 (for short "the said Act of 2004"), the State Government has appointed the Competent Authority. The provisions of the said Act of 2004 have been applied to the said Credit Co-operative. In writ petition No. 8674/2020, a prayer is made for issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to ensure that the amount of about Rs. 235.00 Crores is recovered from the said Co-operative Bank. There are various prayers made including the prayer for revival of the said Credit Co-operative. There is also a prayer for challenging the appointment of the Competent Authority under the said Act of 2004 in respect of the said Credit Co-operative. It is pointed out that by passing an order, the Competent Authority under the said Act of 2004 has virtually ordered closure of the functioning of the said Credit Co-operative.

4. There are various orders passed by this Court from time to time. We may note here that in exercise of powers under Section 38-A of the said Act of 1997, an appointment of a Special Officer was made. However, as provided in sub-section (1) of Section 38-A of the said Act of 1997, the appointment of the Special Officer has come to an end on expiry of the period of six months. As far as the appointment of the Administrator of the Credit Cooperative is concerned, the order dated 26th February 2021 passed by this Court is relevant.

5. Paragraphs No. 5 to 13 of the said order read thus:

"5. The question we considering by passing this order is the issue of appointment of an Administrator of the said Credit Co-operative in the context of the fact that the functioning of the said Credit Cooperative has virtually come to a standstill.

6. We must note here that by exercising power under Section 38-A of the said Act of 1997, a Special Officer was appointed. As provided in sub-section (1) of Section 38-A of the said Act of 1997, the term of the said officer has come to an end on expiry of the period of six months.

7. It is necessary to make a reference to various orders passed from time to time which are relevant for consideration today.

8. Paragraph 3 of the order dated 4th December 2020 makes a note that as the members of the Board of Directors of the said Credit Co-operative have been disqualified, the business of the eighth respondent has come to a stand still. The said order records a prima facie finding that the Special Officer appointed under Section 38A of the said Act of 1997 has no power to conduct the business of the eight respondent. It is also recorded in the said order that it is doubtful whether an Administrator can be appointed in exercise of the powers under Section 38 of the said Act of 1997. It is the said order which records that as on that day