ORDER

1. Petitioner/Banwar Machhua Sahkari Samiti Limited is aggrieved of order dated 6.10.2016 passed by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Sagar Division Sagar in Case No.78-41/2015 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner/Society against the change of its area of operation. Petitioner/Society is also aggrieved of order dated 14.6.2019 passed by the State Cooperative Tribunal, Bhopal in Second Appeal No.136/2016.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/Society submits that the petitioner/Society was registered in the year 2000. Its area of operation was Village-Banwar & Village-Parswaha. Later on, without issuing any notice under Section 12(1) of the M.P.Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short "Act of 1960"), that area of operation was altered by the Officers of the Cooperative Societies and Village-Parswaha was withdrawn from the area of operation of the petitioner/Society so to cause undue benefit to the private respondent/Society. Neither any notice under section 12(1) of the Act of 1960 was issued to the petitioner/Society nor there is any notice brought on record by the respondents to show that any notice was issued in compliance of section 12(1) of the Act of 1960.

3. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State admits that no such notice is available on record.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

5. It is evident that the petitioner/Society was registered as a Cooperative Fisherman Society. Section 9 of the Act of 1960 deals with registration of a Society. Proviso to section 9(1) of the Act of 1960 provides that "no Society shall be registered, if in the opinion of the Registrar, it is likely to be economically unsound or is likely to have an adverse effect upon any other Society".

6. There is no material brought on record to show that the provisions as contained in the first proviso to section 9(1) of the Act of 1960 were ever considered by the competent authority. Section 12(1) of the Act of 1960 provides that "Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, or the rules or byelaws, on the request of more than fifty percent of the members of the Society or if the Registrar considers that an amendment of the byelaws of the Society is necessary or desirable in the interest of such Society, he may, by an order in writing to be served on the Society in the prescribed manner, require the Society to make the amendment within sixty days". Sub-Section (2) of section 12 of the Act of 1960 provides that "If the Society fails to make the amendment within the time specified by the Registrar, the Registrar may after giving the Society an opportunity of being heard and after soliciting the opinion of such Apex Federal Society, as may be notified by the State Government, register such amendment and issue a certified copy thereof to such Society".

7. Thus, certain facts are clear; [1] as per the first proviso to section 9(1) of the Act of 1960, the Registrar is duty bound to examine that registration of another Society will not have an adverse impact upon the existing Society. [2] section 12(1) of the Act of 1960 provides that if the Registrar considers that an amendment of the byelaws of the Society is necessary or desirable in the interest of such Society, he may, by an order in writing to be served on the Society in the prescribed manner, require the Society to make the amendment within sixty days. The requirement is that if the said Society fails to carry out the amendment then after giving an opportunity of being heard and after soliciting the opinion of such Apex Federal Society, as may be notified by the State Government, register such amendment and issue a certified copy thereof to such Society. The respondents have not produced any material on record to show that the competent authority had examined the validity of the amendment and its impact on the health of the petitioner/Society. Admittedly, there is no notice in terms of the requirement of section 12(1) of the Act of 1960. [3] Th