A party's locus to challenge an administrative order is dependent on its direct involvement. A society cannot claim to be aggrieved by orders initiated by a bank without being a party to the proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

R. DEVDAS, J.

1. These intra-court appeals have been filed at the hands of the 1^st appellant - Co-operative Society and the 2^nd appellant, claiming to be the Chairman of the society, being aggrieved of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.103487/2024 and W.P.No.103488/2024 dated 22.06.2024 and an order passed in the Review Petition No.100112/2024 c/w Review Petition No.100113/2024 dated 04.12.2024.

2. Since the impugned orders arise from the common order passed at the hands of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, these two appeals are clubbed, heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

3. During the course of the proceedings additional documents are filed at the hands of the appellant-society and the same are taken on record.

4. The appellants had filed the writ petitions calling in question the order dated 05.03.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Karwar in an appeal filed at the hands of respondent Nos.6 to 8 herein. Initially, respondent No.5/Kanara District Central Co-operative Bank Limited (‘KDCC’ for short) had initiated proceedings vide communication dated 31.07.2019 made by the Managing Director of KDCC Bank addressed to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, with a copy marked to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies seeking initiation of proceedings against the appellant–society for recovery of various loans lent by the Bank to the appellant–society between 2017-18 and 2018- 19. Following the request made by the KDCC Bank, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies appointed an Inquiry Officer in terms of Section 64 (1) of the KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT , 1959 (‘Act’, for short) to inquire into the affairs of the appellant–society. However, there was a change in the Inquiry Officer and after the subsequent change, the Inquiry Officer held an inquiry and submitted a report to the Registrar of Societies in terms of Section 64 (2) of the Act.

5. The Inquiry Officer held an inquiry under Section 64 of the Act and submitted a report. However, the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies found that the report is not specific in fixing the liability and the exact amount that is due to be paid to the KDCC Bank. Accordingly, by communication dated 31.08.2020, the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies requested the Managing Director of the KDCC Bank to initiate proceedings under Section 65B of the Act for inspection of the records of the appellant-society. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated by the KDCC Bank under Section 65B of the Act and after verification of the records of the society a report was once again filed by an officer of KDCC Bank in terms of Annexure-A which was filed along with the writ petition. The officer of the KDCC Bank submitted a report and thereafter Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies passed an order on 18.12.2021 directing initiation of recovery proceedings and criminal proceedings. The appellant-society thereafter initiated proceedings under Section 69 of the Act for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,58,18,207/- against eight persons including respondent Nos.6 to 8 herein. An order of attachment before judgment was passed by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 05.01.2023. Respondent Nos.6 to 8 herein preferred an appeal before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 106 (1)(h) of the Act, being aggrieved of the orders passed under Section 68 of the Act, i.e., order dated 18.12.2021.

6. However, it is the contention of the of the learned senior counsel Sri.Jayaku