Back
2003 Supreme(Cal) 347
High Court Of Calcutta
Arun Kumar Mitra
SRI PRANAB CHOWDHURY - Appellant
Versus
CHAPRA THANA AGRICULTURE MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. - Respondent
C. O. 17335 (W) Of 1993
Decided On : 07/15/2003
KAZI SAFIUDDIN AHMED, SUBIR BHATTACHARJI, Sudip Das
A co-operative society is not a 'state' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, but if the conditions of service of its employees are controlled by statutory rules, a writ petition is maintainable for breach of such obligation under statutory rules.
Headnote:
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY - DISCIPLINARY ACTION - NATURAL JUSTICE - DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE - CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY RULES, 1987, RULE 108 - [Rule 108(14)(lll)] - WHERE A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY DISMISSES AN EMPLOYEE WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, SUCH DISMISSAL IS ILLEGAL AND LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of a co-operative society, was suspended and subsequently dismissed from service on charges of theft. The petitioner challenged the dismissal order on the grounds that he was not given an opportunity of hearing, the enquiry was conducted behind his back, and the relevant documents were not supplied to him.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the dismissal order was illegal and liable to be set aside as the co-operative society had violated the principles of natural justice by not giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and by conducting the enquiry behind his back. The court also held that the petitioner was not supplied with the relevant documents and was not given an opportunity to reply to the chargesheet.
Issues: 1. Whether the dismissal order was illegal and liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to an opportunity of hearing and the relevant documents?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the following legal principles: (i) A co-operative society is not a 'state' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is also not a public undertaking. (ii) If the conditions of service of an employee of a co-operative society are left to be controlled by statutory rules, a writ petition for appropriate writs and/or directions is maintainable for breach of such obligation under statutory rules. (iii) Rule 108 of the Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987, which deals with disciplinary action against employees, requires that the employee be given an opportunity of hearing and be supplied with the relevant documents.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the disciplinary proceedings and the impugned dismissal order, and directed the co-operative society to reinstate the petitioner in service with full back wages.
( 1 ) 1. This Writ petition contains the following prayers :- (A) A Writ of mandamus shall not be issued , commanding the respondent authorities to Re-call and/or withdraw and/or to set aside the Show Cause Notice dated 28th May, 1993, which is set out as annexure 'c' to this Writ Petition; (b) a Writ of Mandamus shall not issue and commanding the respondents to Recall and/or to withdraw and/or to Quash and/or to set aside the decision and/or resolution dated 21st June, 1993 of the board of Directors of Respondent 1 of the said Co-operative operative Society which was communicated to the Petitioner vide letter dated 24th June, 1993, Annexure- "f" to this Writ Petition and further commanding the Respondents not giving effect or further effect to Annexure- T and 'c' herein. (c) For a Writ of Certiorari calling upon the Respondents and/or their agent, Servant, Subordinates to certify the records of the case and bring themselves up before the Hon'ble Court and/or return of the cause if any, pursuing the records your Lordship shall be pleased to quashed and/or set aside the impugned Show Cause Notice annexure 'c' and Impugned Suspension order Annexure-'f' herein. (d) For a Writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondents and/or their agent, Servant, and subordinates from discharging your petitioner from the Service without due compliance of the Rule of law as much as in Rule of natural justice ;.
( 2 ) IN the Writ petition the case as has been made out by the petitioner is, inter alia, as follows-: the petitioner was appointed as Grade-Ill staff in permanent post under chapra Thana Agricultural Marketing Co-operative Society Ltd. (hereinafter termed as said Society ). On 29. 3. 1993 the petitioner was posted as in-charge of Chapra Bazar Shop of the said Society. On the said date that is on 29. 3. 1993 after the completion of the work the petitioner closed the shop room made it unde lock and key and went away. On the next date that is on 30. 3. 1993 the petitioner attended his duty at 9-15 A. M. and opened the said shop room. He found that by cutting corrugated tin shed of the roof of the said shop room large quantum of cloth has been taken away by the process of theft. Immediately the petitioner reported the matter to the Manager and secretary of the Society at head office and as per their verbal instructions the petitioner submitted written information before Chapra Police Station on 30. 3. 1993 at 12-30 P. M. The Duty Officer registered police case bearing chapra Police Case No. 67/93 dated 30. 3. 1993 under Section 461/379, I. PC. Investigation was started by the police. Relevant documents and records were seized. Accordingly stock verification was started as the police asked the society to submit a list of the stolen clothes. It was found that clothes amounting to Rs. 1,00,454. 23 was the closing balance as on 29. 3. 1993 whereas as per Stock Register on the said date the value of clothes was to the tune of Rs. 2,22,694. 63. As a result theft of cloth was to the tune of Rs. 1,22,240. 40. Management of the Society submitted a written report to the investigation Officer. Police arrested some persons in connection with the case produced them before the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, krishnanagar. The said Chapra Bazar Branch Shop Room of the said Society was under coverage of General Insurance for claim/loss out of Burglary, Theft etc, and the Insurance period was valid from 7. 1. 1993 to 6. 1. 1994. Management of the Society accordingly submitted a claim before the Insurance company.
( 3 ) THE petitioner was transferred from Chapra Branch to head office. On 28. 5. 1993 the petitioner received a Show Cause Notice dated 28. 5. 1993 issued by the Chairman of the said Society. The Chairman directed the petitioner to Show Cause as to why disciplinary action would not be taken against the petitioner for the aforesaid shortage of clothes in terms of Rule 108 (14) (lll) of the West Bengal Co-operative
