Point of Law - The principle to be applied is that there must be a injuria sine damnum and not the damnum sine injuria for taking a legal action and a legal recourse. A damage suffered has to be coupled with legal injury. It is this kind of injury on which the right-enforceability may be based.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. P.K. Jani assisted by learned advocate Mr. Viral K. shah for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Ishan Joshi for the respondent-State.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr. Ishan Joshi waives service of notice of rule for respondent-State.

3. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

“(A) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the order dated 8.7.2001 passed by the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, appointing one Mr. A.I. Shaikh as Investigating Officer (Annexure-D) as also the communication dated 20.7.2021 issued by the Cooperation Officer (Admn.).

(B) During the pendency hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and operation of the order dated 8.7.2001 passed by the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, appointing one Mr. A.I. Shaikh as Investigating Officer (Annexure-D) as also the communication dated 20.7.2021 issued by the Cooperation Officer (Admn.).

(C) Any other and further relies as deemed just and proper looking to the facts of this case, may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”

4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a cooperative society registered under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (For short “the Act, 1961) and its area of operation is Khadarpar village and the residents of Khadarpar village are the members of the petitioner society.

(3.1) It is the case of the petitioner that in the area of operation of the petitioner-society, another society being proposed Khadarpar Mahila Doodh Utpadak Sahakari Mandli Ltd had made an application for registration of the said society which came to be dismissed on merits on 15th November,2019. It is the case of the petitioner that one Sumanba Ramdev Gohel who is not the member of the society had submitted complaint dated 8th June, 2021 and the respondent authorities have without issuing notice and without hearing the petitioner society, has appointed investigation officer and has directed the said officer to submit his report and opinion vide communication dated 8th July, 2021.

(3.2) Pursuant to such communication dated 8th July, 2021, the respondent no.4 – Cooperation Officer (Admn.) has issued letter dated 20th July, 2021 directing the petitioner to submit the entire record of the society. Being aggrieved by such action of the respondent authorities, the petitioner-society has approached this Court by filing the present petition.

5. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. P.K.Jani assisted by learned advocate Mr. Viral K. Shah for the petitioner submitted that respondent no.3 - District Registrar of Cooperative Societies at Bhavnagar could not have passed the impugned order dated 8th July, 2021 to call for information from the petitioner-society on the basis of application made by a third party and therefore, letter dated 20th July, 2021 issued by the Cooperative Officer (Administration) is not tenable in law. It was submitted that the District Registrar ought not to have acted on the complaint made by the proposed society which is not a corporate body under section 37 of the Act, 1961 as held by this Court in case of Ramji Mandir Narsinhji & Ors. v. Narsinh Nagar alias Tekri Co. Op Housing Society Ltd & Ors. reported in 1979(1) GLR 801 and in case of Maneklal Mansukhbhai Co. Op. Housing Society Ltd. v. Rajendrakumar Maneklal Shah reported in 2002 (1) GLH 290.

(4.1) It was submitted that the complaint made by such proposed society in the same area where the petitioner-society is being run was rejected by the District Registrar vide order dated 15th November, 2019 and subsequently, on the said complaint, the impugned orders are passed and therefore, such orders are