Back
1998 Supreme(Cal) 312
High Court Of Calcutta
S. B. SINHA, RANAJIT KUMAR MITRA
KISHAN CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD - Appellant
Versus
PARAMANANDA PATRA - Respondent
M. A. T. 1414 Of 1998
Decided On : 07/27/1998
A.BHATTACHARYA, A.P.SRIVASTAVA, N.K.MANNA, R.ROY, S.SANYAL
Mandatory statutory provisions contained in Rule 48 (f) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987 were violated by the Co-operative Society.
Headnote:
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY - EMPLOYEES - TERMINATION OF SERVICES - RULES 48 (F) OF THE WEST BENGAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES RULES, 1987 - JURISDICTION OF WRIT COURT - ALTERNATIVE REMEDY - WRIT OF MANDAMUS - WRIT OF CERTIORARI - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - INHERENT POWER OF EMPLOYER TO SUSPEND EMPLOYEES - SALARY PAYMENT DURING SUSPENSION - TRANSFER OF EMPLOYEES.
Fact of the Case:
Services of the writ petitioners, employees of a Co-operative Society, were terminated by an order dated 20.4.98. The order was passed on the ground of various misconduct committed by the writ petitioners including refusal to join at the transferred posts. The writ petitioners challenged the termination orders on the ground that the provisions of Rule 48 (f) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987 (the Rules) were not complied with.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the mandatory statutory provisions contained in Rule 48 (f) of the Rules had been violated by the Co-operative Society. The court further held that a writ petition was maintainable against the Co-operative Society as the impugned orders were passed by a Special Officer appointed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, after supersession of the Co-operative Society. The court also held that the writ petitioners did not have an adequate alternative and efficacious remedy.
Issues: 1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against a Co-operative Society for violation of mandatory statutory provisions? 2. Whether the provisions of Rule 48 (f) of the Rules were complied with by the Co-operative Society? 3. Whether the writ petitioners had an adequate alternative and efficacious remedy?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. A writ petition is maintainable against a Co-operative Society for violation of mandatory statutory provisions. 2. The provisions of Rule 48 (f) of the Rules were not complied with by the Co-operative Society. 3. The writ petitioners did not have an adequate alternative and efficacious remedy.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals filed by the Co-operative Society. The court directed the Co-operative Society to reinstate the writ petitioners subject to the same terms and conditions by which the writ petitioners were being governed. The court also observed that the Co-operative Society had the inherent power to suspend its employees by not taking any work from them, but in such an event, the employees had to be paid the entire salary.
( 1 ) THE four appeals involving similar questions were taken up for hearing and are being disposed of together. The fact of the matter however shall be noticed from M. A. T. No. 1414 of 1998.
( 2 ) THE petitioner-First Respondent in each case were employees of the appellant which is a Co-operative Society registered under Co-operative Societies Act. Their services were terminated by an order dated 20. 4. 98. Allegedly the said order was passed on the ground of various misconduct committed by the writ petitioners including refusal to join at the transferred posts. The said order of termination dated 21. 11. 97 reads thus :-"whereas Shri Paramananda Patra, Sales Asstt. of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. , Nadia was transferred by the Managing Director of the Union vide his office Memo No. 537 (8) dated 24. 04. 1997. Whereas The Managing Director of the above named Union has issued reminders to proceed to new post after handling over his charge. Whereas Shri Paramananda Patra did not comply with the orders. Whereas on receipt of the report from the Managing Director the undersigned, Shri R. K. Vats, District Magistrate, Nadia and Special Officer of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. has issued show cause notice vide his No. 2238 (5)-DM dated 5. 11. 97 with two weeks time to represent his case as an opportunity to him and whereas the undersigned is not satisfied and is not convinced with the reply submitted by Sri Paramananda Patra of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. , Nadia. Now, the undersigned, Shri R. K. Vats, District Magistrate, Nadia and Special Officer, the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. , as disciplinary authority, is satisfied that Shri Paramananda Patra of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. has committed (1) wilful insubordination (2) disobedience of lawful and reasonable order of his superior authority and the undersigned is also satisfied that the reasonable opportunity of making representation on the removal notice was given to Shri Paramananda Patra of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. Therefore, the undersigned, Shir R. K. Vats, District Magistrate, Nadia and Special Officer, The Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. , under Rule 48 (f) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1987 remove Shri Paramananda Patra of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. , Nadia from the service of the Kishan Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Ltd. with effect from 24th November, 1997 (forenon ). "
( 3 ) THE learned trial Judge on the prayer of the petitioners granted mandatory injunction directing the appellants to reinstate them only on the ground that the said orders of termination have been passed without complying with the provisions of Rule 48 (f) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rule, 1987 (hereinafter called and referred to as the said Rule ).
( 4 ) HOWEVER, it was directed that the said interim order would not prevent the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law, if they so desire from the stage of issuance of the charge-sheet. It appears from the impugned order dated 20. 4. 98 that prior to passing of the said order a direction was issued upon the respondents to produce the records and upon perusal thereof the learned trial Judge found that there was nothing to show that any domestic enquiry had been held or the writ petitioners had been given an opportunity of hearing.
( 5 ) MR. Manna, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, inter alia submitted that as from the impugned order, it would appear that the petitioners had been given show cause notices and the said orders having been passed upon considering the show-cause submitted by the writ petitioners; Rule 48 (f) of the rules must be held to have been substantially complied. The learned counsel sought to urge that the rule making power as contained in section 147 of the West Bengal Co-op
