Balraj Singh vs Registrar, Cooperative Societies Sehkarita Bhawan, Sector 4, Panchkula and Others

K. Kannan, J.—The petitioner challenges an order issuing certificate for recovery. Petitioner''s apprehension is that he will have no right of appeal as the Section 104 itself reveals. The contention is untenable. The finality of proof of arrears, as Section 104 (3) of Haryana Cooperative Societies Act, 1984 contemplates is for the purpose of execution, the source was a decree is final for an executing Court to follow. On the other hand, Chapter XVIII that deals with Appeals and Revision contains a provision u/s 114 that specifically provides through clause (1) (l) right of appeal against the order granting certificate u/s 104. The petitioner has an effective alternative remedy under the Haryana Cooperative Society, Act, 1984 and the writ petition before this Court is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in M. P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd.& another Vs. Jahan Khan ACJ 2007 (3) 214 SC that dealt with the issue of exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 even then there is an alternative remedy. The Court contemplated three contingencies namely (i) where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights (ii) where there is failure of principles of natural justice or (iii) where the orders or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the ultra vires. If according to the petitioner, the order could not have been passed in terms of Section 104, I find the contention to be wrong. The power to issue a certificate is without reference to the other provisions u/s 102 and 103. Section 104 itself contains a non obstante clause such as " notwithstanding anything contained u/s 102 and 103" Section 102 refers to a dispute of Arbitration, Section 103 contemplates the power to refer the dispute to Arbitration. The power of the Registrar to issue an certificate and proceed with the same is independent of the power and procedure for Arbitration contemplated u/s 102 and 103. I would, therefore not find the order to be illegal. The petitioner is entitled to urge on its merits in an appropriate forum provided u/s 114 of the Haryana Cooperative Societies Act, 1984. The petition also contains a challenge to a Civil Court decree. The petitioner will have his remedy if the order has been passed by Civil Court, which according to him, was without any jurisdiction. The petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the correctness of the order under the supervisory jurisdiction of the Court that exists under Article 227 by means of a Civil Revision petition. The petitioner shall have a liberty to challenge the decree passed by the Civil Court initially through a revision petition, if it can make out a ground for such a challenge before the Court.

With these observations the writ petition is dismissed.