JUDGMENT
P.N. Nag, J.
(1) The jurisdiction of the Civil or Revenue Court has been barred under Section 93 when the order for removal of the committee is passed under Section 32 of the Act. Under Section 94 of the Act in exercising the functions conferred on him by or under the Act, the Registrar, the arbitrator or any other person deciding a dispute under Section 61 and the liquidator of a co-operative society or person entitled to audit, inspector hold an inquiry and the Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court, while trying a suit, under the Code of Civil Procedure. 1908 in respect of the following matters, namely:- (A)Summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; (b) requiring the discovery and production of any document; (c) proof of facts by affidavits; and (d) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses.
(2) Under Section 93 no order, decision, or award made under the Act shall be questioned in any Court on any ground whatsoever.
(3) A perusal of Sections 93 and 94 indicates that the jurisdiction of the Civil or Revenue Court insofar as removal of committee is concerned had been barred and given to the Registrar under 32 of the Act and such an order has been made final and cannot be questioned in any Court of law. The Register has been given powers of Civil Court to summon any witness for examination on oath etc. Further the Act has provided for appeal and revision against the order of the Registrar passed under Section 32 of the Act and is a complete code itself for scrutiny of the order of the Registrar. Therefore, this leaves no manner of doubt that the impugned order passed by the Joint Registrar as a quasi-judicial order if not judicial and that order can be passed only after complying With the principles of natural justice and on the basis of material available on record and examining the objections raised by the committee, if any, against the supersession.
(4) Further, it may be noted that the Registrar is a body constituted by the State and the State has conferred on it its inherent judicial power and such body or authority constituted by the legislature while exercising judicial power decides the rights between the parties and binds them. This give a clear indication that such authority is a Tribunal. Having regard to all these facts and various provisions of the Act referred to and discussed above, I have no hesitation to hold that the Registrar acting under Section 32 is, therefore, a Tribunal.
(5) That the appeal lies under Section 76 and revision under-Section 80 of the Act and which have riot ben availed of by the petitioners and as such the present petition therefore should be thrown out on this ground atone can also not be accepted. In this case what has been complained of is that .the directions issued by the Registrar to the Administrator for holding elections of the managing committee has not been complied within the stipulated time. The petitioners have not shown any grievance against the superesession. But the grievance of the petitioners is that the election has not been held inspite of the order ‘passed by the Joint Registrar and they want the implementation of the impugned order and not the quashing of the impugned order. In these circumstances there is no question of filing an appeal in the matter and this objection, therefore, is wholly -frivolous and is rejected.