SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J S Verma, S P Kurdukar, Suhas C Sen
ADMINISTRATOR, KONCH SAHAKARI KRAYA VIKRAYA SAMITI LTD., APPELLANT
VERSUS
SARNAM SINGH AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Civil Appeal No. 867 of 1993, decided on January 8, 1997.
Constitution of India,1950 – Article 226 – Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 – Section 2(o),31,38,98 and 38(1) – Cooperative Societies - Challenging removal from services - Respondent was appointed Secretary - Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Additional District Cooperative Officer was appointed Inquiry Officer - Pursuant to charge-sheet and report of Inquiry Officer, as required by provisions of Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 Society, at behest of District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, passed an order of removal from service - A writ petition was filed in High Court by respondent challenging his removal from service - An objection was taken by appellant to maintainability of writ petition on ground that it did not lie against Cooperative Society - High Court referred to relevant provisions of Act and rejected that objection - Order of removal from service was quashed but it was left open to Cooperative Society to take fresh action and complete inquiry proceedings against writ petitioner in accordance with law - This appeal by special leave is confined only to question of maintainability of writ petition filed in High Court - In present case, it is not necessary for us to examine larger question of maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India against every action of Society - Decision in present case is confined only to maintainability of writ petition by a Secretary of Cooperative Society who has been removed from service in manner provided in statute – Held, court may also refer to Section 98 of Act which enumerates the orders against which appeals are provided. Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 98 provides for an appeal to Tribunal against an order made under sub-section (2) of Section 38 removing or disqualifying any officer of a cooperative society - By an amendment made subsequently in Section 98, an order passed under sub-section (1) of Section 38 for removal of an officer from office held by him or to disqualify him from holding any office has also been made appealable - Scheme of enactment clearly shows that order of removal from service of Secretary of a cooperative society made under sub-section (1) of Section 38 by Society or that under sub- section (2) of Section 38 by Registrar is, therefore, statutory in nature - For this reason alone, it must be held that such an order is amenable to writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution - View taken by High Court that writ petition was maintainable in present case does not, therefore, call for any interference - Appeal fails and is dismissed.
ORDER
1. Respondent 1 Sarnam Singh was appointed Secretary of the Konch Sahakari Kraya Vikraya Samiti Ltd., District Jalaun. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.P., District Jalaun and the Additional District Cooperative Officer was appointed the Inquiry Officer. Pursuant to the charge-sheet and the report of the Inquiry Officer, as required by the provisions of the U. P Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (11 of 1966) (for short "the Act"), the Society, at the behest of the District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, passed an order of removal from service. A writ petition was filed in the Allahabad High Court by the respondent challenging his removal from service. An objection was taken by the appellant to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that it did not lie against the Cooperative Society. The High Court referred to the relevant provisions of the Act and rejected that objection. The order dated 28-6-1988 of removal from service was quashed but it was left open to the Cooperative Society to take fresh action and complete the inquiry proceedings against the writ petitioner (Respondent 1 herein) in accordance with law.
2. This appeal by special leave is confined only to the question of maintainability of the writ petition filed in the High Court. g
3. In the present case, it is not necessary for us to examine the larger question of maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against every action of the Society. The decision in the present case is confined only to the maintainability of the writ petition by a Secretary of the Cooperative Society who has been removed from service in the manner provided in the statute.
4. Section 2(o) defines "officer of a cooperative society" to include also Secretary of a cooperative society. Section 31 relates to the office of the a Secretary, his emoluments and functions. Section 38 provides for removal of an officer of a cooperative society which includes Secretary of the Society. Section 38 is as under :
"38. Removal of an officer of a cooperative society. (l) If in the opinion of the Registrar, any officer of a cooperative society has contravened or omitted to comply with, any provisions of this Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the society, or has forfeited his right to hold office, the Registrar may, without prejudice to any other action that may or can be taken against him, call upon the society to remove, within a specified period, such officer from the office held by him and where necessary also to disqualify him from holding any office under that society for a period not exceeding three years, whereupon the society shall, after affording opportunity of being heard to the officer concerned, pass such orders as it C may deem fit.
(2) On the failure of the society to take action under sub-section (1), the Registrar may, after affording opportunity of being heard to the officer and for reasons to be recorded and communicated to the person and the society concerned, remove, or remove and disqualify for period not exceeding three years, the officer from holding any office under that society.
(3) An officer removed under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), shall, with effect from the date of communication of the order, cease to hold that office and, if disqualified, shall not be eligible to hold any office under that society for the period specified in the order."
5. It is clear from Section 38 that the Society is required by sub- section (1) to take action for removal of an officer of a cooperative society in accordance with the opinion of the Registrar, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the officer concerned. Sub- section (2) further provides that in the event of failure of the Society to take action under sub-section (1), the Registrar himself is empoweredto take the action inter alia of removal from service of the officer concerned
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.