JUDGMENT S. N. PRASAD, J. - Contempt case No.448 of 2018 has been filed for non-compliance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.23578 of 2017, disposed of on 24.11.2017 directing the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to look into the grievance of the petitioner which relates to conclusion of the selection process initiated to fill up the post of Secretary, Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Society under Dhamnagar Block in the district of Bhadrak. The order when not complied with the instant contempt application has been filed in which show cause has been filed by opposite parties stating therein that the authorities are bent upon to comply with the aforesaid order but since there is an interim order passed in W.P.(C) No.23618 of 2017 by virtue of which the selection process is not being concluded, as such this Court has directed the office to list this contempt application along with W.P.(C) No.23618 of 2017 for its disposal, accordingly the aforesaid writ petition has been listed along with the instant contempt application. 2. In W.P.(C) No.23618 of 2017 two-fold prayers have been made, i.e. (i) To quash the order dtd.17.12.2016 passed by the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Marketing) as contained under Annexure-4; (ii) To quash the letter No.1318 dtd.2.6.2017 of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bhadrak Circle, Bhadrak addressed to the President, Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Society Ltd. as under Annexure-5. 3. Before entering into the facts of the case it is relevant to give brief history. A writ petition has been filed by one Santosh Kumar Mohapatra being W.P.(C) No.13397 of 2016 in the nature of Public Interest Litigation by the two directors of Shree Jagannath Service Co-operative Society raising the grievance related to irregularity in procurement of paddy from the farmers / agriculturists, who are members of the society, which according to the petitioner, have been committed by the Secretary-in-Charge of the Society. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, while disposing of the writ petition vide order dtd.22.8.2016, directed the petitioner that if the grievance will be raised afresh before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, the same will be considered and decided by him or any other officer duly authorized by him by passing reasoned order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and other concerned parties as expeditiously as possible, reasonably within three months from filing of the same. In terms of the aforesaid order the matter was heard by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies and disposed of by passing order dtd.30.1.2017. The present petitioner has also put his appearance before the Registrar. The petitioner, namely Santosh Kumar Mohapatra has pointed out various facts including the High Court’s order which was passed in W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2014 filed by one Sudarshan Majhi, working as Assistant Secretary, Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Societies Ltd. praying therein to quash the advertisement under Annexure-4 dtd.24.2.2014 notified for recruitment to the post of Secretary in Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Societies Ltd. and further for issuance of direction upon opposite party no.3 to examine the matter relating to his promotion to the post of Secretary by calling the records from the management in-charge of the society and pass order in accordance with law. This Court, while disposing of the aforesaid writ petition vide order dtd.2.3.2016, has directed the Management in-Charge of Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Society to consider the grievance of the petitioner, namely Sri Sudarshan Majhi so far as over age factor is concerned and if he satisfies that he is not overage, opportunity be given to him to participate in the process and till that period, result of the selection shall not be given effect to, the entire exercise shall be completed with period of four weeks. The interim order passed earlier shall continue till the period of four weeks. The petitioner, in violation of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2018, has not filled up the post of Secretary and has illegally appointed one Sri Prakash Chandra Rout as Secretary in-Charge. The interim order passed earlier shall continue till the period of four weeks. The petitioner, in violation of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2018, has not filled up the post of Secretary and has illegally appointed one Sri Prakash Chandra Rout as Secretary in-Charge. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, after taking note of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2014, specifically the interim order passed therein, has come to conscious finding by taking into consideration the factual aspect to the effect that Sri Prakash Chandra Rout, in-charge Secretary of the Society who was initially an employee of Dobal Service Cooperative society has been allowed to function as Secretary in-charge of the petitioner-society herein without considering that two cooperative societies being two different identity and two different management having its own staff and deputation of one staff from one society to another is illegal as the staff are not under common cadre and under one management but without considering this aspect, allowing Sri Prakash Chandra Rout to work as Secretary in in-charge capacity of the petitioner - society and taking attempt to regularize as secretary of the society by simply passing of resolution is illegal and beyond the scope of the management and general body of the society, as such the management of the petitioner – society was directed to carry out the orders of this Court dtd.2.3.2016 passed in W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2014 regarding appointment of secretary of the society. The authority, in terms of the aforesaid order, has also come out with another order on 2.6.2017 to implement the order. It is also relevant to point out here that another writ petition being W.P.(C) No.9081 of 2016 which also pertains to appointment of Chief Executive of Sri Jagannath Service Cooperative Society by way of direct recruitment wherein also similar order passed by this Court in 13397 of 2016 has been passed directed the President of the petitioner-society to take steps to fill up the post of Secretary of the society strictly adhering to the direction of this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions within 7 days of issue of its letter. Both the order dtd.17.12.2016 under Annexure-4 and direction / communication dtd.2.6.2017 under Annexure-5 are under challenge in this writ petition. 4. Both the order dtd.17.12.2016 under Annexure-4 and direction / communication dtd.2.6.2017 under Annexure-5 are under challenge in this writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while vehemently arguing the case by assailing both the orders, submits that under the provision of Section 28 it is the managing committee who is competent to take decision for appointment of secretary. The Registrar or any functionary of the State Government has got no jurisdiction to interfere with the selection process since it is the exclusive domain of the managing committee. He has also relied upon the Staff Service Rule issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies issued on 7.2.2011 wherein it is provided that the appointment is to be made by the managing committee, hence interfering with the selection of Mr. Rout as Secretary in-charge is nothing but exceeding the jurisdiction by the office of the Registrar. It has been submitted that the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 has been issued by the management in-charge who has got no competency to issue advertisement, as such the same is contrary to the Staff Service Rule dtd.7.2.2011. 5. Per contra, Mr. Amit Pattnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate, Mr. P. K. Parhi appearing for the intervener and Mr. Ajodhya Ranjan Dash, learned counsel appearing in the contempt application jointly submitted that the petitioner – society is flouting the repeated direction passed by this Court. This Court has repeatedly directed to fill up the post of secretary in regular capacity and taking into consideration the specific direction passed by this Court the Registrar, Cooperative Societies has issued a general direction on 12.2.2014 to take immediate steps to fill up all the vacancies in the cooperative societies and in terms thereof the managing committee has published the advertisement on 24.2.2014. It has been submitted that the day when the management in charge has come out with the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014, the petitioner – society was not in existence, rather the petitioner – society has came into existence only w.e.f. 18.1.2015, the day when the election to the members of the committee of the management of the petitioner – society was completed and thereafter the new President, namely Shri Nityananda Dash, by whom this writ petition has been filed, was elected on 9.2.2015, thus it is evident that the day when the advertisement was published, the management in charge was under the control of the society for doing day today function but when the Registrar has come out with a general direction, who is the ultimate authority under the Cooperative Societies Act, he has issued the aforesaid advertisement and initiated the selection process but immediately after came into existence, the petitioner – society has hold the selection process in abeyance and allowed Mr. Rout to function in in-charge capacity by handing over to him dual charge by way of stop gap arrangement, hence the action of the petitioner – society is absolutely illegal, unreasonable and contrary to the direction passed by this Court. 6. In response learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the management in-charge is not competent body to come out with the advertisement in terms of the Staff Service Rule dtd.7.2.2011 as also the moment the managing committee has came into existence, the power conferred to it under the statute as also under the Staff Service Rule dtd.7.2.2011 have been exercised and in exercise of aforesaid power, Mr. Rout has been allowed to function in in-charge capacity of Secretary, as such there is no infirmity in the same. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the entire records along with annexure and appreciated the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties. The undisputed facts in this case are; (i) Dispute is going on to fill up the post of secretary since the month of February, 2014, the day when the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 was published. (ii) One Sri Sudarshan Majhi, who was working as Asst. The undisputed facts in this case are; (i) Dispute is going on to fill up the post of secretary since the month of February, 2014, the day when the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 was published. (ii) One Sri Sudarshan Majhi, who was working as Asst. Secretary in the petitioner – society, has approached to this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(C) No.10141 of 2014 seeking a direction to condone the over age and consider his candidature, this Court, while disposing of the writ petition vide order dtd.2.3.2016, has directed the management in-charge of the petitioner – society to consider the claim of the petitioner by providing an opportunity of being heard and till its consideration the result is not to be published, the part of the order is being quoted herein below for ready reference:- “Considering the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it appears from the application for intervention filed by opposite party no.6, i.e. Misc. Case No.14850 of 2015 that for selection to the post of Secretary some candidates have appeared before the selection board and participated in the selection process. So far as Sri Jagannath SCS is concerned, the petitioner’s name finds place at serial no.2 and his candidature has been rejected on the ground that he is overage. Mr. S. Ghose, learned counsel for the petitioner emphatically states that by the time the petitioner submitted his application and by the time the selection was conducted, the petitioner was not over-aged because he was continuing as Asst. Secretary of Sri Jagannath SCS Ltd. Thereby, he is entitled to get age relaxation up to 45 years of age. It is stated that by the time the authorities have conducted the selection process, the petitioner has not completed 45 years of age, therefore the finding of the selection committee that he is over-aged is absolutely misconceived one. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing opposite party no.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner so far as overage factor is concerned. If the petitioner satisfies that he is not over-aged, opportunity is given to him to participate in the selection process and till that period the result of the selection shall not be given effect to. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks. If the petitioner satisfies that he is not over-aged, opportunity is given to him to participate in the selection process and till that period the result of the selection shall not be given effect to. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks. The interim order passed earlier shall continue for a period of four weeks.” (iii) Other writ petitions were filed being W.P.(C) Nos.8807 of 2014 and 9081 of 2016 and in both the writ petitions petitioners have been given liberty to approach before the concerned opposite party for completion of selection process for the post of secretary of the petitioner – society. (iv) Writ petition being W.P.(C) No.23578 of 2018 has been filed by one Siba Prasad Dash seeking a direction to conclude the selection process of the post of Secretary of the petitioner – society. This Court has disposed of the aforesaid writ petition directing the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to look into the grievance of the petitioner and complete the selection process if there is no legal impediments. Selection process has not been concluded in terms of the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 therefore a public interest litigation being W.P.(C) No.13397 of 2016 was filed and Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court has been pleased to dispose of the writ petition directing the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to pass reasoned order, the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, in terms of the aforesaid order, has passed order on 17.12.2016 directing the management of the petitioner – society to carry out the orders of this Court passed in W.P.(C)No.10141 of 2014 regarding appointment of Secretary of the Society. The day when the advertisement was published, the present management of the petitioner – society was not in existence, it came into existence only on 18.1.2015 and President has been appointed on 09.2.2015. The present management, after coming into being after due election, has allowed Mr. Rout to function as in-charge Secretary of the society which has been taken note by the Joint Registrar in the order dtd.31.2.2017 deprecating the action of the society in allowing Mr. Prakash Chandra Rout of Dobal Service Cooperative Society attaching him to work as Secretary of Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Society and then attempting to regularize him as regular Secretary by simple passing a resolution, has been declared to be illegal and beyond the scope of the management or general body of the society. 8. Prakash Chandra Rout of Dobal Service Cooperative Society attaching him to work as Secretary of Shree Jagannath Service Cooperative Society and then attempting to regularize him as regular Secretary by simple passing a resolution, has been declared to be illegal and beyond the scope of the management or general body of the society. 8. In the aforesaid backdrop of the factual aspects, the contention raised by the petition is to be scrutinized by this Court who has raised the very question of jurisdiction of the Registrar by taking aid of the provision of Section 28. It is evident from the provision of Section 28 that the power has been vested upon the managing committee to frame different service conditions. The petitioner has also taken the aid of Staff Service Rule dtd.7.2.2011 wherein the power of appointment has been conferred upon the managing committee. This Court after going through the provision as contained in Section 28 as also the Staff Service Rule dtd.7.2.2011, has found that the power of selection although has been vested upon the managing committee but it is also evident from the statutory provision that the Registrar is the ultimate authority to take decision for supersession of the committee and power to disqualify officers in exercise of power conferred under Section 32 if in the opinion of the registrar, the committee of the society; (i) is in persistent default; or (ii) is in negligence in the performance of its duties imposed on it by this Act, Rules or by-laws; or (iii) has committed any act prejudicial to the interest of the Society or its members; or (iv) is stalemate in its constitution or functions. Thus it is evident that Registrar has been conferred with the power to monitor and supervise the function of the cooperative societies and if in his opinion the functioning is not as per the provision of the Act, action is to be taken by him for superseding the committee which suggests that Registrar cannot be said to be silent spectator. 9. This Court has repeatedly directed to fill up the post of secretary on regular basis and in terms of the aforesaid direction the registrar has issued a general direction on 12.2.2014, in terms thereof, the management in-charge has issued the advertisement on 24.2.2014 for fulfilling the post of secretary on regular basis. 9. This Court has repeatedly directed to fill up the post of secretary on regular basis and in terms of the aforesaid direction the registrar has issued a general direction on 12.2.2014, in terms thereof, the management in-charge has issued the advertisement on 24.2.2014 for fulfilling the post of secretary on regular basis. The present management who is now heading the present society, has kept the entire process of fulfilling the post of Secretary of the society at hold and allowed Mr. Rout to function as secretary in in-charge capacity by giving him charge in addition to his original assignment of Secretary of Dobal Service Cooperative which is entirely different entity having its different establishment and situated in different place. The very purpose of establishing the society is to look after the welfare of its members and the same can only be achieved by proper management which can only done by a full-fledged officer to look after all the business. The principle of stop gap arrangement cannot be said to be proper. It can only for the transitory period and for a short time, i.e. till the making of regular arrangement since stop gap arrangement has been deprecated and it is not healthy for better functioning of any establishment. The Staff Service Regulation also suggests the process and mode of appointment which shall be filled up by direct recruitment or deputation or promotion as the managing committee may decide in consultation with the financing bank, the process of mode of appointment as contained under clause 6 of the aforesaid guideline dtd.7.2.2011 is being quoted herein below:- “6. Mode of Appointment; i) a) Grade-I post: The Grade-I post shall be filled up by direct recruitment or deputation or promotion as the Managing Committee may decide in consultation with the financing Bank. b) In case of direct recruitment the candidates having the minimum qualification of graduation from a recognized University shall be eligible for consideration, and c) In case of promotion, the Grade-II employees of the society with minimum qualification of intermediate or +2 Arts, Science or Commerce and with minimum of 5 years experiences in the Grade-II posts having clean service records would be eligible for consideration. Provided that the minimum educational qualification prescribed under this clause shall not apply to the employees holding the Grade-II post prior to issue of these guidelines, for promotion to the Grade-I post.” It is evident from the aforesaid provision that there is stipulation for direct recruitment or deputation or promotion, as such it is evident that the appointment is to be made on substantive basis. The stop gap arrangement can be made only till the regular appointment is being made. The contention of the petitioner that Mr. Rout who was allowed to discharge his duty in the capacity of Secretary cannot be interfere with by the Registrar, has got no substance in view of the fact that even under Staff Service Rule, there is provision to fill up the post on substantive basis either through direct recruitment or deputation or promotion but no where it is stipulated to run the office of the Secretary by allowing a person who is holding the post of Secretary in another society in in-charge capacity by taking dual charge. The Registrar since been conferred with the power that in case of persistent default he is competent to take decision for supersession after following the procedure as laid down under Section 32 of the Odisha Cooperative Societies Act, 1962, as such the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted by this Court that the Registrar will be silent spectator if any post in the Society is not filled upon substantive basis in terms of the Staff Service Rule, dtd.7.2.2011 which has been formulated by the Registrar in terms of the power conferred u/s.33A of the Odisha Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 (Odisha Act 2 of 1963). 10. It is further evident that when this Court is repeatedly passing directions to conclude the selection process, the present management of the society is not only flouting the repeated directions passed by this Court, but also kept the entire selection process at hold which has been initiated in terms of the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 by taking the plea that the Registrar has got no jurisdiction to come out with the advertisement. It has not been explained by the learned counsel for the petitioner that why the present management of the petitioner – society is not inclined to fill up the post of Secretary on substantive basis, as such keeping the entire process of selection at hold without any reason cannot be said to be a justified action on the part of the society, rather it will be held to be arbitrary, contrary to the statute and commission of persistent default. 11. This Court after taking into consideration all these aspects in detail is of the view that the order passed by the joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies dtd.17.12.2016 as also dtd.2.6.2017 as contained under Annexure-4 and 5 respectively does not warrant any interference by this Court. Accordingly writ petition stands dismissed. 12. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, therefore, is directed to monitor the process of selection which has been initiated by virtue of the advertisement dtd.24.2.2014 and ensure that the selection be made strictly in terms of the merit and in terms of the Rules and Regulations applicable in the field and take all sincere endeavours to conclude the selection process within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies is also directed to look into the matter regarding the persistent default committed by the management of the present petitioner-society by taking appropriate action in accordance with law. The writ petition as well as the contempt case are accordingly disposed of with the observation and direction made herein above. Petitions disposed of.