SAHARA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY  Vs UNION OF INDIA

W.P.(C) 669 -670/2021 Page 1 of 5
$~6 & 7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 669/2021
SAHARA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Simranjeet Singh, Ms. Neha Gupta, Ms. Rhea
Dube, Mr. Aadhar Nautiyal & Mr.Vijay K umar,
Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with
Mr.Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr. Kamal R.
Digpaul, Mr. Vinay Yadav, Mr. Akshay Gadeock,
Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Sahaj Garg & Mr. R. Venkat
Prabhat, Advs. for UOI

+ W.P.(C) 670/2021
SAHARAYN UNIVERSAL MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED
….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Simranjeet Singh, Ms. Neha Gupta, Ms. Rhea
Dube, Mr. Aadhar Nautiyal & Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advs.

versus

UNION OF INDIA ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with
Mr.A shees H. Jain, CGSC with Mr. Vinay Yadav,
Mr. Akshay Gadeock, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Sahaj Garg & Mr. R. Venkat Prabhat, Advs . for UOI
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SIN GH

O R D E R
% 15.01.2021
2021:DHC:180-DBW.P.(C) 669 -670/2021 Page 2 of 5
The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video
conferencing.
C.M.No.1624/2021 (exemption) in W.P.(C) 669/2021
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.
C.M.No.162 6/2021 (exemp tion) in W.P.(C) 6 70/2021
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 669/2021 & C.M.No. 1623 /2021(stay)
1. Rule DB. W.P.(C) 670/2021 & C.M.No. 1625 /2021(stay)
The above two writ petitions are being taken up together due to
similitude of facts and common questions of law involved. With the consent
of the parties W.P.(C) 669/2021 is treated as lead matter and all reference s
in the present order with regard to the pages of the paper book and the dates of the order are in reference to the said petition.
2. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner during the course
of his arguments has taken this Court to various orders passed by the Central
Registrar of Co -operative Society under the Multi State Cooperative
Societ ies Act, 2002. Attention is specifically drawn to a Circular dated 3rd
July, 2017 issued by Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers’ Welfare under the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare (Annexure
P-4 to the writ petition) and has place d reliance on paras 2 and 3 thereof
which read as under:
“2. Whereas, these multi- state cooperative societies are
functioning as autonomous cooperative organizations
2021:DHC:180-DBW.P.(C) 669 -670/2021 Page 3 of 5
accountable to their members as per the provisions of the MSCS
Act, 2002 and rules made thereunder, the business matters such
as accepting of deposits, giving loan to members and repayment of deposits fall under the powers and functions of the Board of
Directors of the multi-state cooperative societies and
office of
the Central Registrar has no role to pay on these matters .
3. As such, to make it clear to the members/investors/public, all
multi-state cooperative societies (except multi-state cooperative banks) are hereby directed to display the following in the entrance of the society, branches, in the forms relating to
various deposits and also to post in their websites, if any
maintained:

“
Multi -state cooperative societies are functioning as
autonomous cooperative organizations accountable to their
members and not under the administrative con trol of the
Central Registrar, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’
Welfare. Therefore, the depositors/members are advised to take
decision for investing deposits based on the performance of the
society at their own risk. Central Registrar, Ministry of
Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare does not provide any
guarantee for these deposits
3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the
orders dated 22.07.2020 at page 63, dated 24.09.2020 at page s 64-65 and
order dated 19.11.2020 at page s 66-67 are co ntrary to the provisions of the
Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 a s also contrary to Circular
dated 3rd July, 2017. It is also contended that the basic premise on which the
order is passed is completely mispla ced in as much as even if it is accepted
for the sake of arguments that some complaints have been received, it is
only from a miniscule percentage of the members i.e. less than 0.06%, while
the Society has thousands of members enrolled with it. It is also submitted .”
(emphasis supplied )

2021:DHC:180-DBW.P.(C) 669 -670/2021 Page 4 of 5
that between July, 2019 to December, 2019 the petitioner has already paid
₹17,487.82 crores thus there is no default, in payment by petitioner’s
society.
4. Learned senior counsel submits that even otherwise, the complaints
ought not to have been entertained by the respondents directly , as the
petitioner has introduced an Online complaint grievances settlement process
5. Having heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and looking
to the Circular dated 03.07.2017 and the provisions of the Multi State
Cooperative Societies Act, 2 002 as well as the facts of the case, we are of
the view that the petitioner has established a prima facie case in its favour
and therefore the complaints can be sent on this portal and will be redressed.
Senior counsel for petitioner strenuously argues that a ll these points have
been highlighted by the petitioner in the reply given by th e petitioner to the
Central Registrar including the objection that he has no power, jurisdiction
and authority to deal with the issues / complaints of the depositors /
members as Multi State Cooperat ive Societies function as autonomous
cooperative organiza tions accountable to their members and are not under
the administrative control of the Central Registrar, Ministry of Agriculture
and Farmers’ Welfare. It is thus prayed that c onsidering the provisions of
Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 and th e letter and spirit of the
Circular dated 03.07.2017, the impugned orders dated 22.07.2020,
24.09.2020 and 19.11.2020 (which are at annexure P -1 (Colly .) to the memo
of this writ petition) be quashed. Learned senior counsel further prays that
during the pe ndency of the present writ petition s operation of the said
impugned orders be stayed.
2021:DHC:180-DBW.P.(C) 669 -670/2021 Page 5 of 5
and the balance of convenience is also in favour of the petitioner. I f the
impugned order is not stayed, petitioner will be unable to carry out its
business, which would automatically result in loss and consequent winding
up of the petitioner society . Thus there will be irreparable loss to the
petitioner.
6. In view of the above, further proceedings before the Central Registrar
– Resp ondent No. 2, as well as the operation, implementation and execution
of the impugned orders referred to above which are dated 22.07.2020,
24.07.2020 and 19.11.2020 at annexure P -1 (Colly .) are stayed till the next
date of hearing
7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents seek s time to file
counter affidavit. Time as prayed for is granted. . Meanwhile petitioner in W .P.(C) 669/2021 and petitioner in
W.P.(C) 670/2021 is permitted t o carry o n its business activities in
accordance with law and as per the by e-laws of the petitioner co- operative
society.
8. Let the counter affidavit be filed before the next date of hearing.
9. List on 19.02.2021.

CHIEF JUSTICE

JYOTI SINGH, J
JANUARY 15, 2021
ns
2021:DHC:180-DB