JUDGMENT U.C. Srivastava, J. - These petitions have been bunched together as common questions arise in these cases to the effect as to whether the Director of Small Scale Industries is the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies for registering Societies for collecting bones, hides and skin of dead animals etc., or registration of the same has to be done by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies and the registration made by him will be valid so as to enable the said registered society to obtain licence from Zila Parishad for its business of collecting bones, hides and skin and the further question which arises is as to whether only one Co-operative society for one Nyaya Panchayat can be registered or there can be more than one cooperative society within the area of one Nyaya Panchayat. Writ Petition No. 1551 of 1985 which is the leading case, prayer for quashing the order dated 2-5-1985 passed by Zila Parishad, Barabanki cancelling the licence of the petitioner granted earlier has been made besides the prayer or direction to the opposite parties not to put any hindrance in collecting bones, hindes etc., in Block Banki, district Barabanki. 2. In writ petition No. 951 of 1985 arising out of different application of district Barabanki, a prayer for quashing notice issued by the District Assistant Registrar informing the members that within the jurisdiction of one Nyaya Panchayat one society will be registered and further prayer has been made that Zila Parishad be directed not to issue licence to those societies which have been registered by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies. In other petitions, prayer of similar nature mentioned in above two petitions have been made. 3. The petitioners of societies i.e. Pashu Shav Chhedan Vikray Shriram Samvida Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Gandhi Nagar, Barabanki was registered by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society, Faizabad Division on 19-9-1984 as Labour Contract Society which according to its allegations consists of only Chamar community whose customary business from the aucestrol period is that of collecting bones, hides etc., of dead animal. It appears from the counter affidavit that some of the members of the petitioners society applied for registration if Industrial Co-operative Society to the Director of Industries who rejected the same on 22-6-1982 against which a writ petition is pending. It appears from the counter affidavit that some of the members of the petitioners society applied for registration if Industrial Co-operative Society to the Director of Industries who rejected the same on 22-6-1982 against which a writ petition is pending. Under the bye-laws of Zila Parishad the contract for the said purpose is given by way of licence to the highest bidder and without licence no one can carry on the business. Litigation in the matter had started since past and the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 27-4-81 gave directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh for instructing the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies for taking steps to organise the co-operative societies of persons carrying on occupation of skilling and further directed the Zila Parishad to give contracts to those co-operative societies. It was thereafter that the State of Uttar Pradesh issued letters to the Director of Industries Kanpur who was also Registrar of Industrial Co-operative Societies, U.P. and to all the District Magistrates directing them to organise and register Co-operative societies of those persons who carry on the business of collecting hides and bones. 4. A notice was circulated on 1-4-85 by Zila Parishad, Barabanki asking that persons who are interested in the matter would apply with requisite licensing fee and it was provided in the said notice that preference will be given to the legally registered Co-operative societies. This clause seems to have been inserted in view of the amended bye-laws of Barabanki Zila Parishad which were notified in U.P. Gazette on 2-3-1985. The said bye-laws provide that for collecting bones and hides etc. ordinarily not more than one licence should be granted for one Gram Panchayat and if area of a particular Nyaya Panchayat will be large one then the same will be entitled into more than one and for this portion not more than one licence will be granted. The bye-laws further provide that if more than one application for licence is given for one Nyaya Panchayat or area of a Nyaya Panchayat, preference will be given to the legally registered Co-operative society. The tender given by the petitioners society was accepted and it was given licence to carry on the business of collecting hides and bones and after cleaning them to sell it. The petitioners society deposited the requisite amount of Rs. 61325.25 p. for the same. The tender given by the petitioners society was accepted and it was given licence to carry on the business of collecting hides and bones and after cleaning them to sell it. The petitioners society deposited the requisite amount of Rs. 61325.25 p. for the same. It was thereafter on 2-4-1985 that the order of cancellation of licence was passed which according to the petitioner was done without giving any opportunity of hearing to them. This cancellation order was passed on the ground that the petitioners society was not a duly registered society if having been registered with Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. According to the petitioner the society having been registered in the month of September 1984 and the State Government having issued a circular in the month of December 1984 viz. 15th December 1984 informing all the District Magistrates that hence forth no such society will be registered by him but the circular did not affect the society registered before its issuance. The cancellation order it seems has taken note of the fact that some influential contractors got there society registered from the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies which was against the State Governments decision in respect of which subsequently a directive dated 15-12-1984 contained in the aforementioned circular was issued stating that such societies are to be registered only by the Director of Industries and the licences which have been granted to societies not registered by the Director of Industries are to be cancelled. 5. The petition has been contested by the State and the Zila Parishad and also by Pashu Shav Chhedan Audyogik Utpadan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Gandhi Nagar, Barabanki which was impleaded at its instance on the ground that it was a duly registered Co-operative society and the licence could not have been granted to the petitioner and it was to be granted to those societies the membership which was confined to the poor members of Chamar community whose customary business was skinning, collecting bones, hides, skins etc. wherein the petitioners society is Labour Contract Society dominated rather by members of one family which ever owns several trucks and are rich people. wherein the petitioners society is Labour Contract Society dominated rather by members of one family which ever owns several trucks and are rich people. The opposite party No. 4 which is a registered society was registered by Deputy Director of Industrial Co-operative Societies, Directorate of Industries, U.P. Kanpur as Industrial Co-operative Society on 20-2-1982 i.e. after the letter dated 2-5-1981 issued by the State Government for registering such Co-operative societies. The opposite party No. 4 also gave a notice on 23-1-1984 to the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies and various reminders were sent to it not to register such societies which are to be registered only by the Director of Industries. On 21-2-1985 the Registrar, Co-operative Societies also wrote a letter to the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Faizabad that all such type of societies are only to be registered by the Director of Industries or by an officer empowered for the purpose of registration of Industrial Co-operative Societies as they come within the zone of industries with reference to State Government letter dated 20-12-1984 and earlier letter dated 10-1-1984. 6. Section 3 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act provides that the State Government may appoint a person to be the Registrar of Co-operative Societies for the State and for the purposes of the Act by general or special order confer on any person all or any of the powers of the Registrar. Such an order shall be deemed to confer on him all the powers under that provision. The State Government vide Notification No. C - 1314/XII - CA - 314 (R) - 62 dated April 10, 1970 published in U.P. Gazette dated 18th April 1970 conferred powers of Registrar, Co-operative societies under Section 3 of the Act upon any officer for the time being holding any one of the posts of the Director of Industries, U.P., the Additional Director of Industries, In - Charge Industrial Co-operative Scheme and the Deputy Registrar, Industrial Co-operative U.P. at the headquarters of Directorate of Industries to exercise the powers of the Director of Industries. 7. Thus in view of the above notification, the officers mentioned therein were to exercise the powers Registrar, Co-operative Society even for registration of Industrial Co-operative Societies. Powers to register such societies were conferred upon any other officer of the Co-operative Department prior or subsequent to the publication of the said notification. 8. 7. Thus in view of the above notification, the officers mentioned therein were to exercise the powers Registrar, Co-operative Society even for registration of Industrial Co-operative Societies. Powers to register such societies were conferred upon any other officer of the Co-operative Department prior or subsequent to the publication of the said notification. 8. It is to be noticed that in the State Governments letter dated 15-12-1984 by which it was impressed that such societies are to be registered as Industrial Co-operative Societies by the Director of Industries. Some letter was also issued on 10-1-1983, copy of which has not been filed by either party, reference of which finds place in Registrar, Co-operative Societies letter dated 2-2-1985, which is on record but neither of the party to the case have placed the said letter dated 10-1-1983 on record. Under the existing directions one society for one particular area was to be registered and the society of opposite party No. 4 having already been registered by the Deputy Director of Industries for the purposes that is Industrial Co-operative Society in 1982 the petitioner society applied subsequent to it in 1984 for registration of its society as Labour Contract Society. Rule 2 (s) of U.P. Co-operative Society defines Labour Contract Society. The same reads as under :- "2 (s) Labour Contract Society means a primary society, the primary object whereof is to carry out labour contract works or to secure employment for its members on piece wage basis or on partly piece wage basis and partly time wage basis." The primary object of such a society is very clear and the difference between such a society and Industrial Co-operative Society is obvious. Industrial Society has been defined in Rule 2 (q) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Rules and the same is as under :- "2 (s) Industrial Society means a Co-operative society the primary object whereof is to manufacture goods itself or to facilitate the manufacturer of goods by its members." The object of Industrial Society is wide enough which would include collection and processing of raw material before manufacturing of goods, flaying curing and tanning of hides and skins and ancillary industries connected with the same and cottage leather industry is village industry within the meaning of Section 2 (viii) of U.P. Khadi and Village Industries Board Act. Model bye-laws framed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies in respect of Industrial Society and Labour Contract Society is quite different and in view of its objects and the model bye-laws Labour Contract Society is to be registered by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, that is, the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society who is competent to register the same. But a perusal of the objects and bye-laws of the petitioners society, some extracts of which have been placed on record, shows that its object or not the objects of a labour Contract Society but are in conformity with that of an Industrial Co-operative Society an indication of which can even be got from its name and yet the Deputy Registrar who had no powers to register such a society registered it as a Labour Contract Society. Section 6 of the Co-operative Societies Act provides for the application for registration of a society and the requirements for the same. Section 7 of the Act provides that if Registrar is satisfied that the application complies with the conditions laid down under clauses (a) to (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 7 he shall register the society and its bye-laws, It is thus the duty of the Registrar before registration of a society to see whether the society proposed to be registered is in accordance with the provisions of Co-operative Societies Act and Rules framed thereunder and the bye-laws conform to the purpose and object of the society. He is also to scrutinise that the proposed society complies with the requirements or conditions as laid down in Appendix for Societies in general as well as for the particular class of societies to which the proposed society belongs as envisaged under Rule 8 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968. It appears that the Deputy Registrar without scrutinising the object and bye-laws of the petitioners society which was sought to be registered as (Labour Contract Society registered it even though from the objects and bye-laws it was evident that it was an Industrial Society, the registration of which was beyond his power. If there was no deliberate act on the part of the Deputy Registrar there was failure on his part to perform his duty and to apply his mind. If there was no deliberate act on the part of the Deputy Registrar there was failure on his part to perform his duty and to apply his mind. The registration of the petitioners society was not legal and the petitioner society is thus not being a legally registered society for the objects and purposes for which an Industrial Co-operative Society can be registered The petitioners society could have been registered for providing labour or contract for labour providing for physical labour in the matter of hides, bones and skins but not to perform functions or exercise rights and duties including manufacture and sale which are within the exclusive jurisdiction of Industrial Co-operative Society. 9. After the decision by a Division Bench of this Court dated 1-8-1984 in Writ Petition No. 63 of 1983 Pashu Shav Upyog Adyogik Utpadan Sahkari Samiti Ltd. against Zila Parishad, Barabanki, it appears that there was further amendment in the bye-laws of Zila Parishad, Barabanki. The Bench took into consideration the fact that grant of more than one licence for an area may lead to widen, as such it was desirable that not only preference should be given to a Co-operative Society but it should further be ensured that after such a licence is granted to a Co-operative society, a middle mand should not be allowed to enter into the field, and one licence may be granted in respect of one Nyaya Panchayat but in that event separate portion of circle be allocated to different licences. Under the bye-laws framed by Zila Parishad, Barabanki for one Nyaya Panchayat not more than one licence can be granted This is in order to avoid cut throat compensation between the members of same Nyaya Panchayat and they should carry out work through the Co-operative society in a particular area. They bye-law could not be said to be violative of Article 10 of the Constitution as the same not only avoids cut throat competition but gives opportunity to all the persons of that circle to work through Co-operative Society The classification is reasonable and advances the cause of Co-operative movement on the Directive principles of State Policy enshrined in the Constitution of India. A labour contract society cannot be granted licence for collecting dead animals and take out hides and skins from them and thereafter sell it or carry on manufacture. A labour contract society cannot be granted licence for collecting dead animals and take out hides and skins from them and thereafter sell it or carry on manufacture. The only work which can be assigned is to collect dead animals and to do other necessary physical labour for taking out skin and hides from them. A licence which is granted by Zila Parishad is not a limited one but its scope is quite wide and the said purpose can only be fulfilled by an industrial Co-operative society. The petitioners Society not having been registered as an industrial Co-operative society that is a cooperative society which was entitled to get the licence for bones, hides and skins granted by Zila Parishad, Barabanki. The order which has been passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies cancelling the registration order was perfectly legal and just. Even otherwise registration did not empower the petitioners society to get the licence of bones, hides and skins and the Zila Parishad obviously was not competent to grant licence to these Co-operative societies which were not legally registered cooperative societies for the purposes for which licence was granted. 10. Thus the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies rightly recalled the order vide order dated 2-4-1985 registering this petitioners society and in this view of the matter the petitioners societies are not entitled to work in their respective blocks as their society is not a legally registered society for the purpose for which licence is granted by the Zila Parishad. 11. In view of what has been stated above, writ petition No. 1551 of 1985 lacks merits and deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed and the interim order, if any, is discharged. There will be no order as to costs. 12. In writ petition No. 951 of 1985 in which a prayer for quashing a notice issued by Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies dated 21-1-1985 inviting the societies which want to register their society to submit their applications for registration by opposite party No. 2, and the prayer for mandamus directing Zila Parishad not to issue licences for hides, bones to those societies which have been registered by opposite party No. 2, the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Faizabad for the year 1985 - 86 is allowed and the said notice dated 21-1-1985 contained in Annexure 7 is quashed and the mandamus as prayed for is issued. Interim order, if any, is discharged. 13. In writ petition No. 6745 of 1985 a prayer for quashing order dated 16-12-1985 passed by Zila Parishad, Barabanki contained in Annexure 6 and the order dated 21-11-1985 passed by opposite party No. 3 has been made and a mandamus has been sought commanding the opposite parties 2 and 3 not to give effect to the same and further to direct opposite party No. 4 not to interfere in the business of the petitioner. In view of what has been discussed in proceeding writ petition, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed as the impugned orders are perfectly legal and just Interim order, if any, shall stand discharged. 14. In writ petition No. 6746 of 1985 quite similar prayer has been made. As such this writ petition is also dismissed on the very same ground. Interim order, if any, is discharged. 15. In writ petition No. 6747 of 1985 similar prayer has been made. As such this petition is also dismissed on the same ground. Interim order is discharged. 16. Writ petition No. 6864 of 1985 is also directed against the identical order. As such it is also dismissed and the interim order is discharged. 17. Writ petition No. 559 of 1986 is also dismissed on the same ground and the interim order is discharged. 18. Writ petition No. 1275 of 1986 is also dismissed as the petitioners society is not entitled for consideration of its application as its registration has been cancelled. Interim order is discharged. 19. Writ petition No. 1566 of 1986 is also dismissed as the petitioners society is not duly registered society and has no right to participate in the auction. 20. Writ petition No. 1567 of 1986 is also dismissed on the same ground on which the preceding one has been dismissed. Interim order is discharged. 21. Writ petition No. 1568 of 1986 is also dismissed on the same ground and interim order is discharged. 22. Writ petition No. 2105 of 1986 is also dismissed on the same ground and interim order is discharged. 23. Writ petition No. 2109 of 1986 is also dismissed on the very same ground and interim order is discharged. 24. Writ petitions Nos. 2110 and 1363 also deserve to be dismissed. They are dismissed accordingly. The interim order is discharged.