Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Under this section it is only the Registrar who has power to direct to special 36] Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 [ Sec. 41 officer to terminate services of an employee. Nandkishore Roy vs. The State of Bihar, 1989 (1) BL.J 472. Sub-section (9) of this Section is applicable only in cases of supersession of the managing committee of the co-operative society but shall not override the special provisions under Sub-sections (5) and (6) of this Section which are applicable in cases where the old managing committee ceases to exist. As a result of corning into force of sub-section (5) of this Section a fresh election is to be held. Vidya Singh vs. The State of Bihar, 1989 (1) BLJR 513. If for any reason election is not held after expiry of 3 years term of the members and within the extended period of 9 months in view of section 14 (9). the managing committee of such co-operative society shall be deemed to have been superseded with effect from the said date under this section of the Act. Nawal Kishore vs. The State of Bihar, 1991 (1) PLJR 572. In a proceeding initiated under this Section, it is open to the Registrar to make an interim order of suspension while proceeding to take action under this Section the order of interim suspension shall be deemed as separate and independent order, although contemporaneous and cannot be said to be a composite order. Saathi Joint Farming Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. The Registrar, 1991.(1) PLJR 625: 1991 (1) BLJR 265. . Section 41(6)-supersession of Co-operative Society and taking over of its management by State Government-nature of power. Brij Bihari Singh vs. State of Bihar, 1990(2) PLJR 217. Sections 41 and 48---no election of a Board of Directors can be set aside except by filing an election petition-no election can be said to be void ab initio merely on the suo motu assessment of a party or the Government-the Government or the appellate authority cannot abrogate to itself the authority to declare an election void even if according to it correct procedure was not followed and it cannot proceed to effectively destroy the result of the election by resorting to dissolution of the Board of Directors. Vijay Kumar Mishra vs. State of Bihar, 1989 PLJR 846. • Section 41--Limitation on power of the Registrar for supersession of managing committee. Chandeshwar Prasad vs. State of Bihar, 1987 PLJR 159 (FB).] Dissolution of a society can be done in accordance with provisions of section 41 and Administrator can be appointed by Registrar after dissolution of society under sub-section (1) or (5) of section 41. Virendra Kumar Roy vs. State of Bihar, 2005(1) PLJR423. Order of Managing Director deaffiltating the petitioner Bank from the Apex Bank challenged before Registrar. Registrar, on the recommendation of Managing Director of the Apex Bank issuing show cause as to why the Board of Directors of the petitioner Bank be not suspended. First and foremost requirement u/s 41 (1) even for issuing show cause notice being satisfaction to be recorded by Registrar and opinion to be formed. Registrar neither recording satisfaction nor forming opinion and simply referring to recommendations of the Managing Director of Apex Bank. Show cause notice patently illegal. Raj Kishore Prasad vs. State of Bihar, 2005(4) PL ·'R 571. Registrar has to form an opinion about the existence of the grounds before issuing a notice inviting objection. Such opinion should be subjective one based on materials. Recording of pnma facie satisfaction about the existence of the grounds before issuing trie notice and the materials for forming the opinon being before the Registrar then it cannot be said that the Registrar issued the notice without forming an opinion. It there are some materials before the authority to form an opinion then its sufficiency cannot be gone at the initial stage of issuance of notice. Bihar State Cooperative Bank vs. State of Bihar, 2005(2) PLJR 665.]