Milla Ram vs Joint Secretary to Government of Haryana

N.K. Sodhi, J.—Petitioner is a member and share-holder of the Kaithal Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited, Kaithal (for short the Sugar Mill). It is alleged that in terms of the agreement executed between the parties, the petitioner had grown sugar-cane on this agricultural land which as per the agreement was to be taken over by the Sugar Mill. It is further alleged that when the crop was ready for harvesting the Sugar Mill did not lift the crop inspite of several requests made by the petitioner in this behalf Petitioner also claims that he suffered huge loss in this regard for which he claimed compensation from the Sugar Mill. Disputes having arisen between the parties the same were referred to the arbitration of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kaithal. This reference was made under Sections 102/103 of the Haryana Co-operative Societies Act, 1984 (for short the Act). After allowing the parties to record their evidence oral and documentary the arbitrator gave its award on 13.11.1992 holding that the Sugar Mill should pay a total amount of Rs.13,650/- along with interest thereon. It was held that 220 quintals of sugar-cane grown by the petitioner had dried up for which he suffered huge losses on account of the failure of the Sugar Mill to lift the crop. It was further held that 105 quintals of sugar-cane seedlings were supplied by the petitioner to the farmers on the asking of the Sugar Mill for which the latter did not make the payment. Feeling aggrieved by the award, the Sugar Mill filed an appeal before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Karnal which was allowed on 26.8.1994. The Deputy Registrar after perusing the entire record came to the conclusion that it was the petitioner who was at fault in not supplying the sugar-cane to the Sugar Mill. It was further held that Munadi was done through the sarpanch and chowkidar of the village repeatedly and individual notices were also sent to the petitioner ''under certificate of positing'' to supply the sugar-cane grown by him but he failed to do so. It is because of this default that the Deputy Registrar held the petitioner liable and allowed the appeal. The other issue regarding the supply of 105 quintals of sugar-cane seedlings to the farmers was not adverted to by the Deputy Registrar in his order. Petitioner then felt aggrieved by the appellate order and filed a revision petition u/s 115 of the Act before the State Government which was heard by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Haryana, Co-operation Department. The order of the Deputy Registrar was affirmed and it was held that in spite of several notices sent to the petitioner he failed to supply the sugar-cane to the sugar Mill and, therefore, he was himself to blame for the loss, if any, suffered by him. In view of these findings, the revision petition was dismissed on 4.8.1997. It is against these orders that the present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution.

We have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Registrar and the State Government. As regards the loss suffered by the petitioner in regard to 220 quintals of sugar-cane grown by him, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings recorded by the two officers. They have referred to record on the basis of which they have found that in spite of several notices issued the petitioner did not supply the sugar-cane. Even munadi was done in the village repeatedly to call upon him and other to supply the sugar-cane but they did not do so. These findings are basically findings of fact with which we are not inclined to interfere in the exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Now coming to the other contention raised by the learned counsel for, the petitioner. It is contended that the Assistant Registrar found that the petitioner had supplied 105 quintals of sugar-cane seedlings to the farmers at the instance of the Sugar Mill for which he had not been paid by the latter. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though this contention was accepted by the Assistant Registrar his award has been set aside by the Deputy Registrar without adverting to this issue. We find merit in this contention. A perusal of the impugned orders shows that the issue of supply of seedlings to the farmers and the payment to be made by the Sugar Mill for the same has not been dealt with. This being so, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in this regard.

In the result, the writ petition is partly allowed, the impugned orders set aside and the case remanded to the Deputy Registrar to deal with the issue regarding the price of 105 quintals of sugar-cane seedlings which the petitioner supplied to the farmers at the instance of the Sugar Mill. The Deputy Registrar will decide this issue on merits in accordance with law after hearing the parties. Let the needful be done expeditiously but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Parties are directed to appear before the Deputy Registrar on 11.10.1999 for further proceedings.

Copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.