Back
P.P.NAOLEKAR, S.B.SINHA
S. S. Rana – Appellant
Versus
Registrar, Co-operative Societies – Respondent
The ratio decidendi regarding the powers of the Central Registrar, as derived from the provided legal document, is that the Registrar's authority is primarily regulatory and supervisory in nature rather than executive or controlling. The Registrar has the power to constitute the managing committee of a cooperative society through election or appointment, including the appointment of additional members to represent specific interests. The Registrar also has the authority to confirm or replace appointed members and to regulate the qualifications and security conditions for officers and employees of the society. Furthermore, the Registrar holds the power to place officers or employees under suspension if necessary, and such suspension can be effected without the need for prior approval if directed by the Registrar. The Registrar's role is thus to ensure compliance with the statutory provisions, rules, and bye-laws, and to oversee proper governance rather than to exercise deep and pervasive control over the society's day-to-day functioning (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, J.—The petitioner was working as a Branch Manager in the Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (Respondent No.2, “Society”). A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him purporting to be in terms of Rule 56(b) of the Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Employees (Terms of Employment and Working Conditions) Rules, 1980 (for short the “Rules”) read with Section 35-B(4) of the Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1968 (for short the “Act”). He was found guilty therein. The Managing Director of the Society, by an order dated 18/11/1993, terminated his services purported to be in exercise of his power under Rule 2(p) of Appendix 1(a) of the Rules. In the meantime, an Administrator was appointed by the State to manage its affairs. The appellant herein preferred an appeal against the said order terminating his services before the Administrator on or about 2.12.1993. However, the Administrator had no occasion to deal with the said appeal. By an order dated 18.11.1995, the Board of Directors of the Respondent No. 2 dismissed the said appeal. He reached the age of superannuation on 30th September, 1996.
2. The appellant filed a writ petition before the High Cou
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
