The Chief Executive/Secretary of a co-operative society holds a dual statutory character as both an office bearer and an employee. Disputes regarding their removal are not purely private employment matters but fall within the regulatory authority's jurisdiction to ensure institutional accountability and prevent a remedial vacuum.

judgment :

Arun Dev Choudhury, J.

1. All these four appeals have been taken up together for the final hearing.

2. The judgment and order dated 13.03.2025 passed in WP(C) No.925/2022 has been assailed by the private respondents in WA 147/2025 and by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in WA No.120/2025.

3. The judgment and order dated 09.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.6945/2024 is assailed in WA No.185/2025 by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam and by the private respondents in WA No.174/2025.

4. WP(C) 6945/2024 was delivered, applying the determination made in the judgment dated 13.03.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 925/2022.

5. Thus, the primary challenge in these appeals arise from the judgment dated 13.03.2025 passed in WP(C) No.925/2022, (hereinafter referred to as Bikarampur judgement), whereby the learned Single Judge interfered with the order dated 10.01.2022, passed by Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam and held that the Registrar lacked the jurisdiction to examine the legality of the decision of the Board of Directors of a Society in removing the appellant from the post of Secretary/ Chief Executive.

6. The material facts of WA 147/2025 and WA 120/2025 are not in dispute. The appellant was appointed as Secretary of the Bikarampur Co-operative Society, pursuant to a Board of Directors resolution dated 05.10.2021. Within a short span, the Board, upon certain complaints, adopted a resolution dated 01.12.2021, cancelling the appointment and initiating a fresh recruitment process. The appellant approached the Registrar invoking the statutory mechanism under Section 111 of the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 2007). The Registrar, after hearing the parties, recorded that the removal had been effected without affording any opportunity of hearing, that the decision-making process suffered from want of quorum and that the statutory provisions governing the conduct of meetings had been violated. On these findings, the Registrar set aside the Board's decision and restored the appellant to the post, which was challenged before the learned Single Judge.

7. The learned Single Judge, however, proceeded to set aside the order of the Registrar on the ground that the dispute was purely between an employer and the employee and therefore, is outside the jurisdiction of the Registrar under Section 111, 92 or 49 of the Act, 2007 and accordingly, allowed the writ petition.

8. In WA 174/2025 and WA 185/2025, the facts in a nutshell are that, to remove the Secretary from the Rajyuswarpur Co- Operative Society, the Board decided to hold a meeting on 04.12.2014, to pass a resolution to that effect. By a resolution taken on that day, the Board decided to terminate the services of the respondent No.5/Secretary of the Society. The reasons assigned in the said resolution for the removal of the Secretary were that a qualified secretary is required who should be a graduate; but the incumbent was found to be only a matriculate. Certain al