ORDER :

At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent nos. 5 and 6 are permitted to be corrected as “Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pakur” and “Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pakur” respectively.

Considering the present pandemic situation, office is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of the writ petition.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings initiated by the respondent no. 5 – the Certificate Officer-cum-Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pakur against the petitioners in connection with Certificate Case Nos. 65/2018-19, 66/2018-19, 67/2018-19, 68/2018-19 and 69/2018-19 respectively.

2. The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that the petitioners were acting as agents in the office of the respondent no. 7 – the Chairman, Jabardaha LAMPS, Pakur and they were entrusted with the job of collecting the amount on daily basis from different account holders who were members of the Cooperative Society, Sonajori LAMPS, Pakur and on the subsequent day, they used to deposit the same with the member secretary of the said Cooperative Society. Under special circumstance, the amount was also deposited with the Cooperative Bank, Pakur and the slips in this regard were handed over to one Raghunandan Saha – the then Secretary of the said Cooperative Society. On maturity, the beneficiaries were to get the said amount. The respondent no. 5 served notices to the petitioners issued in the aforesaid certificate cases alleging that they did not return the loan amount taken by them and further ordered to obtain NOC by refunding the same with 21% interest thereon otherwise action under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1914”) would be taken against them. The petitioners submitted their respective replies stating that at no point of time, they had taken any loan from the said Cooperative Society. They further claimed that whatever amount was collected by them, the same was deposited with the then Secretary of the said Cooperative Society, however, the impugned notices were not recalled. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an audit was conducted by the auditor and from the said audit report, it would be evident that the liability has been fastened upon the petitioners on the basis that they did not deposit the collected amount of the depositors with the said Cooperative Society. The audit report nowhere indicates that the petitioners were given loan as alleged in the notices served to the petitioners. Thus, the demand notices issued by the respondent no. 5 suffer from foundational error of fact as there is no document to support that the petitioners had taken loan. The demand notices were issued only to cover the laches of the office bearers of the Cooperative Society and arbitrarily fastened the liability upon the petitioners without any rhyme or reason. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 5 cannot assume the role of the Certificate Officer for the reason that he has already issued demand notices against the petitioners. The petitioners are having valuable right to file their objection in the certificate proceedings, which needs to be properly adjudicated by the Certificate Officer before proceeding to finalize the demand, if at all against the petitioners. In view of the aforesaid fact, since the respondent no. 5 has already disclosed his intention on the aspect of the amount to be recovered from the petitioners conducting the certificate proceeding will be a mere mechanical exercise resulting into gross injustice to the petitioners. Thus, the initiation and continuation of proceedings against the petitioners by the respondent no. 5 suffers from gross biasness and are in violation of the principles of natural justice. The action of the Certificate Officer is also in the teeth of the provisions un