JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner, which is a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 order dated 14.02.2018 issued by the respondent Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, based on an inspection report dated 26.10.2017 submitted by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Vythiri under Section 66 of the said Act. By Ext.P3 order, the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Vythiri has been authorised to submit a report under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act to surcharge persons who are responsible for the loss caused to the Society in terms of the aforesaid report dated 26.10.2017. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that an inquiry under Section 68 cannot be conducted in terms of Ext.P3 order dated 14.02.2018, in the absence of a specific point or points on which the inquiry is to be made is mentioned in the said order. 2. On 28.03.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader sought time to get instructions and the matter was ordered to be listed on 05.04.2018. This Court ordered that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be deferred for a period of two weeks. The said interim order, which was extended from time to time, is still in force. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. Along with the counter affidavit, a copy of the enquiry report submitted under Section 66 of the Act is placed on record, as Ext.R1(a). In the counter affidavit, it has also been stated that, a copy of the said report was served on the petitioner along with Ext.P3. 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit raising various contentions. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 6. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P3 order issued by the respondent under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act. 7. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 6. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P3 order issued by the respondent under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act. 7. The fact that Ext.P3 order by the respondent is one issued, in exercise of his powers under Section 68 of the Act, read with Rule 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, is not in dispute. The basis for Ext.P3 order is Ext.R1(a) report submitted under Section 66 of the Act. 8. The petitioner would contend that a copy of the report under Section 66 was never furnished. On the other hand, the respondent would contend that a copy of the said report was enclosed along with Ext.P3. However, it is not discernible from Ext.P3 that a copy of such report was enclosed along with that order. At this point of time, the question as to whether the petitioner was issued with a copy of the report along with Ext.P3 order has no much relevance, since the copy of the said report has already been placed on record as Ext.R1(a) along with the counter affidavit filed by the respondent. 9. Now the issue that has to be considered is as to whether proceeding under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act can be initiated against the petitioner based on Ext.P3 order. 10. Section 68 of the Act deals with surcharge. 9. Now the issue that has to be considered is as to whether proceeding under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act can be initiated against the petitioner based on Ext.P3 order. 10. Section 68 of the Act deals with surcharge. As per sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act, if in the course of an audit, inquiry, inspection or the winding up of a society, it is found that any person, who is or was entrusted with the organisation or management of such society or who is or has at any time been an officer or an employee of the society, has made any payment contrary to the Act and the rules or the bye-laws, or has caused to any loss or damage in the assets of the society by breach of trust or wilful negligence or mismanagement or has misappropriated or fraudently retained any money or other property belonging to such society or has destroyed or caused the destruction of the records, the Registrar may, of his own motion or on the application of the committee, liquidator or any creditor, inquire himself or direct any person authorised by him by an order in writing in this behalf, to inquire into the conduct of such person. Sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) deal with the procedure that has to be adopted based on such inquiry. 11. The procedure for conduct of an inquiry and inspection is provided under Rule 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 66 deals with inquiry under Section 65 or inspection under Section 66 of the Act and sub-rule (7) of Rule 66 deals with an inquiry under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act. Sub-rules (1) and (7) of Rule 66 read thus: 66. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 66 deals with inquiry under Section 65 or inspection under Section 66 of the Act and sub-rule (7) of Rule 66 deals with an inquiry under sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Act. Sub-rules (1) and (7) of Rule 66 read thus: 66. Procedure for the conduct of inquiry and inspection:- (1)(i) An order, authorising inquiry under Section 65 or inspection under Section 66 shall among other things, contain the following: (a) the name of the society whose affairs are to be inquired into or whose books of accounts are to be inspected; (b) the name of the person authorised to conduct the inquiry or inspection; (c) in specific point or points on which the inquiry or inspection is to be made, the period within which the inquiry or inspection is to be completed and report submitted to the Registrar; (d) costs of inquiry or inspection; (e) any other matter relating or pertaining to the inquiry or inspection. (2) A copy of every order authorising inquiry under Section 65 or inspection under Section 66 shall be issued to the President or the Secretary of the Society concerned by registered post with acknowledgment due. A copy of the order shall also be made available to the Central Society or societies, to which the society in respect of which the order is issued, is affiliated. xxxx xxxx xxxx (7)(i) The order in writing for an inquiry under sub-section (1) of section 68 of the Act shall among other things contain the following:- (a) name of the society whose affairs are to be inquired into or whose books of accounts are to be inspected; (b) name of the person authorised to conduct the inquiry; (c) the specific point or points on which the inquiry is to be made; (d) the period within which the inquiry is to be completed and report submitted to the Registrar; (e) costs of inquiry or inspection; (f) any other matter relating or pertaining to the inquiry. (ii) On getting the inquiry report, the Registrar shall give the person or persons concerned an opportunity of being heard before issuing an order for surcharge. The order for surcharge shall be in writing and shall be sent under registered post with acknowledgment due. (ii) On getting the inquiry report, the Registrar shall give the person or persons concerned an opportunity of being heard before issuing an order for surcharge. The order for surcharge shall be in writing and shall be sent under registered post with acknowledgment due. The order shall among other things contain the following: (a) name of society; (b) name/names of person/persons responsible or repay or restore the money or any property or any part thereof, by mentioning clearly the total amount involved due from each; (c) the rate of interest if any, to be clearly specified; (d) the amount of cost or compensation to be specified; (e) the period within which the amount is to be realised; (f) in case the person responsible is not remitting the amount within the time-limit so fixed, the society shall report the matter to the Registrar forthwith and the Registrar shall realise the amount as per the Revenue Recovery Act. 12. A reading of provisions under sub-rule (7) of Rule 66 would make it explicitly clear that the order in writing for an inquiry under subsection (1) of Section 68 of the Act shall among other things, contain the matter enumerated in sub-clauses (a) to (f) of clause (i) of sub-rule (7), which includes specific point or points on which the inquiry is to be made. 13. In the context of the provisions under Section 65 of the Act and sub-rule (1)(i) of Rule 66 of the Rules, this Court in Cheranellur Cooperative Society Ltd v. Deputy Registrar [ 1976 KLT 353 ] held that, under Section 65 of the Act, the Registrar or any other officer of the department to whom the powers of the Registrar are delegated by the notification can order an inquiry. But in ordering an inquiry the specific point or points on which the inquiry is to be made are to be made known in the proceedings that is issued. This is what is insisted by Rule 66(1)(c) of the Rules. Not only that, without indicating the proceedings that is to precede an inquiry, the point or points on which inquiry is to be conducted, it goes without saying that no proper inquiry will be possible. This is what is insisted by Rule 66(1)(c) of the Rules. Not only that, without indicating the proceedings that is to precede an inquiry, the point or points on which inquiry is to be conducted, it goes without saying that no proper inquiry will be possible. Again, for the society and its office bearers to face the inquiry in a just manner the indication of the point or points on which the inquiry is to be conducted in the proceedings is only essential. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said decision reads thus: 4. Shri Siby Mathew, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the 2nd respondent cannot overlook the mandatory provisions contained in Rule 66 (1) of the Rules in issuing the proceedings like Ext.P1 ordering an enquiry under Section 65 of the Act. Rule 66 (1) of the Rules reads: “66. Procedure for the conduct of inquiry and inspection.-(1)(i) An order, authorising inquiry under Section 65 or inspection under Section 66 shall among other things, contain the following: (a) the name of the society whose affairs are to be inquired into or whose books of accounts are to be inspected; (b) the name of the person authorised to conduct the inquiry or inspection; (c) the specific point or points on which the inquiry or inspection is to be made, the period within which the inquiry or inspection is to be completed and report submitted to the Registrar; (d) costs of inquiry or inspection; (e) any other matter relating or pertaining to the inquiry or inspection.” Learned Government Pleader has no specific answer to the above contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The stand taken by the learned Government Pleader is that there are charges of misappropriation in the petitioner-society which are being enquired into by the Vigilance Department and in the above circumstances an enquiry under Section 65 of the Act cannot be said to be out of place. 5. No doubt, under Section 65 of the Act, the Registrar or any other officer of the department to whom the powers of the Registrar are delegated by the notification can order an enquiry. But in ordering an enquiry the specific point or points on which the enquiry is to be made are to be made known in the proceedings that is issued. This is what is insisted by Rule 66 (l)(c) of the Rules. But in ordering an enquiry the specific point or points on which the enquiry is to be made are to be made known in the proceedings that is issued. This is what is insisted by Rule 66 (l)(c) of the Rules. Not only that, without indicating in the proceedings that is to precede an enquiry, the point or points on which enquiry is to be conducted, it goes without saying that no proper enquiry will be possible. Again, for the society and its office bearers to face the enquiry in a just manner the indication of the pointer points on which the enquiry is to be conducted in the proceedings is only essential. In this view of the matter, Ext.Pl proceedings cannot be sustained. Hence I quash Ext.Pl.” 14. Having considered the law laid down by this Court in Cheranellur Co-operative Society Ltd case (supra) and also the statutory provisions as contained in sub-rule (7) of Rule 66, this Court finds that Ext.P3 order issued by the respondent, without mentioning the specific point or points on which the inquiry is to be made under Section 68 of the Act, based on the findings in Ext.R1(a) report under Section 66 of the Act cannot be sustained. 15. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by setting aside Ext.P3 order dated 14.02.2018 issued by the respondent and by directing the respondent to consider the matter afresh with reference to the findings in Ext.R1(a) report under Section 66 of the Act and pass fresh orders, after complying with the statutory mandate of clause (i) of sub-rule (7) of Rule 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. Necessary orders in this regard shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.