( 1 ) THIS petition under Art. 226, raises the question relating to the scopar of s. 15 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act 1961. The facts lie in a small compass and they are as follows: On 2nd jan 1974, the Asst Registrar of Co-operative Societies who is also the Asst registrar for Money Lenders, Puttur, made an order authorising S. A. Khader, co-operative Extension Officer, Vistal, to enter the petitioner's premises, lor the purpose of searching some documents. His order reads as follows :" Whereas a summon has been issued to Sri M. V. Rasquinha, vittal, Buntwal Taluk on 16-11-1974 to produce the receipts and such other document relating to his business of money lending at his residence as required under S. 15 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961, Sri M. V. Rasquinha has failed to produce the aforesaid documents for the purose of verification. ( 2 ) I, S. Seshappa Rai, MDC, Asst Registrar of CS and Asst Registrar for Money Lenders, Puttur, in exercise of the powers vested in me under Sec. 15 of the Karnataka Money Landers Act 1961, do hereby authorise Sri S. A. Khader, Co-operative Extension Officer, Vittal, tot enter upcn any premises where he believes such records and documents to be and search for them and may ask any question necessary for interpreting or verifying such records. Given under my hand and seal on this 2nd day of Jan, 1974. Sd/. Asst Registrar of CS and Asst Registrar of Money Lenders, Puttur. " while forwarding the search warrant to the Extension Officer, the Asst registrar has further stated :" Copy to Sri S. A. Khader, Co-operative Extension Officer, Vittal, for immediate motion. He may seize the suspected documents found necessary and produce before the undersigned for verification. Sd/. Asst Registrar of CS and Asst Registrar of Money Lenders, Puttur, SK. " ( 3 ) THE authorised Officer, on receipt of the above order searched the premises of the petitioner and seized as many as 28 documents, which according to him were suspected and naeded for verification. He produced those documents before the Asst Registrar of Co-operative Societies. ( 4 ) CHALLENGING the validity of the seizure the petitioner has moved this Court with an application under Art. 226. He produced those documents before the Asst Registrar of Co-operative Societies. ( 4 ) CHALLENGING the validity of the seizure the petitioner has moved this Court with an application under Art. 226. The question is whether the search and seizure referred to above, could be supported by the power conferred under S. 15 of the Karnataka money Lenders Act 1961. The section provides :" 15. Power of authorisede Officer to require production of record or document-For the purpose of verifying whether the business of money-lending is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this act, any Registrar, Asst Registrar or any other Officer authorised by the State Govt in this behalf, may require any money-lender or any person in respect of whom the Registrar, Asst Registrar or the Officer so authorised has reason to believe that he is carrying on the business of money-lending in the State, to produce any record or document in his possssesion which in his opinion is relevant for the purpose, and thereupon such money-lender or person shall produce such record or document. The Registrar, Asst Registrar or Officer so authorised may after reasonable notice at any reasonable time enter any premises where he believes such record or document to be and may ask any question necessary for interpreting or verifying such record. "the section confers power on the statutory authority to call for any record or document from any money-lender or any person for the purpose of verifying whether the business of money-lending is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Whenever there is any such demand, it is obligatory for the person to produce the required record or document. The power is also conferred on the statutory authority or any authorised officer, to enter upon any premises where he believes such record or document to be and could ask any question necessary for interpreting or verifying such record. That is all the power under S. 15. The section doits not provide as to what the statutory authority should do if there is any disobedience to the demand for record. It is clear from the provisions of the section that it does not authorise the Registrar, Asst Registrar or Officer so authorised to issue search warrant to search or seize any document belonging to the money-lender or any other person. It is clear from the provisions of the section that it does not authorise the Registrar, Asst Registrar or Officer so authorised to issue search warrant to search or seize any document belonging to the money-lender or any other person. The impugned search warrant with a power to seize the suspected document, was, therefore, clearly unauthorised. ( 5 ) IN the result, the Rule is made absolute. A writ in the nature of certiorari shall issue quashing the seizure of the documents under Ext. 'a' with a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to return the said documents forthwith to the petitioner. In the circumstances, I make no order as to costs. --- *** --- .