JUDGMENT :

This Court feels it apt, to begin this judgment with the following concise aptitude of the petitioner, to litigate upon a recovery proceedings for recovery of public money initiated against her.

2. This could be said to be the best example, where a litigant for the reasons best known to her had played with the jugglery of the judicial proceedings, despite of the various false pretext and statement being placed before the writ courts as apparent from the order sheet of the writ petition, just to buy time to honour the loan liability, which could be termed as to be a conscious abuse of the process of the law court.

3. The brief facts of the case are that in the year 1987, the petitioner has contended, that a Society was registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, under the name and style of the “Jan Jagran Samiti”. The society, thus, constituted in accordance with its objective, which was the basis for registration, and in accordance with the objectives provided therein in its bye laws, under which it was registered. It is contended by the petitioner that its object was women empowerment, health education, leprosy eradication, rehabilitation and environment conservation. The petitioner has contended, that the society was initially registered, which continued with its registration, till it was later on renewed by the Renewed Registration No.49 of 2014-2015, which remains effective for a period of 5 years, with effect from 15th March 2014.

4. The petitioner has come up with a case, that the internal management of the society thus registered, was vested in the Governing Body of the society, as provided in its clause 3 of its bye laws. It is alleged that in the year 2008, when the erstwhile Chief Minister Mr B.C Khanduri, had visited District Almora, it is contended by the petitioner, that the Honorable Chief Minister, had ensured the society of the petitioner for its uplift in the financial status of the society, to provide infrastructural and financial help to the society, in order to augment the various training programs, which is alleged to have been undertaken by the society of the petitioner for the uplifting of the cultural heritage of the hills, and particularly for providing, an employment to the rustic and illiterate women villagers. It was contended that the prime objective of the Society, with which it was registered under the Societies Registration Act, was also to work in building and developing cooperatives for the aforesaid objectives of the society, but this itself will be with the note, that the said purpose as projected by the petitioner, that the society intended to augment a cooperative development in the hills, in fact, is contrary to the stand taken by the respondents in their counter affidavit, wherein, the respondent No.4, had specifically denied the fact that the alleged “Jan Jagran Samiti”, was at any point of time was ever registered as a cooperative Society under the provisions of the either UP Cooperative Societies Act or later on as enforced under the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act. Hence, for all practical purposes, the alleged “Jan Jagran Samiti” and there was no evidence on record to support the stand of the petitioner of being a Cooperative thus it, cannot be treated as to be having a legal status as that of being a cooperative society, due to the specific denial of the said fact by the counter affidavit of the respondent no.4, who happens to be the Principal Secretary of the Cooperative, Secretariat, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.

5. The controversy, which begins factually, which is the subject matter of consideration in the present writ petition, is that the petitioner has contended that the respondent No.2, which happens to be a statutory Corporation created for the purposes of providing a multipurpose finances and development of various Bodies at a local level, is said to have approved the proposal of the project of the petitioner on 7th March 2008. As a consequence