Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Chh) 404

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY, J.
Horilal Chouhan, S/o. Late Shrawan Kumar Chouhan - Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Co-Operative Department and Ors. – Respondents
WPC No. 33 of 2024, WPC No. 285 of 2024, WPC No. 247 of 2024, WPC No. 262 of 2024, WPC No. 309 of 2024, WPC No. 312 of 2024, WPC No. 9 of 2024, WPC No. 1028 of 2024, WPC No. 1024 of 2024, WPC No. 25 of 2024, WPC No. 45 of 2024, WPC No. 48 of 2024, WPC No. 51 of 2024, WPC No. 58 of 2024, WPC No. 62 of 2024, WPC No. 64 of 2024, WPC No. 111 of 2024, WPC No. 900 of 2024, WPC No. 901 of 2024, WPC No. 910 of 2024, WPC No. 911 of 2024, WPC No. 912 of 2024, WPC No. 917 of 2024, WPC No. 919 of 2024, WPC No. 921 of 2024, WPC No. 925 of 2024, WPC No. 926 of 2024, WPC No. 927 of 2024, WPC No. 936 of 2024, WPC No. 937 of 2024, WPC No. 939 of 2024, WPC No. 940 of 2024, WPC No. 942 of 2024, WPC No. 948 of 2024, WPC No. 950 of 2024, WPC No. 833 of 2024, WPC No. 290 of 2024, WPC No. 291 of 2024, WPC No. 294 of 2024, WPC No. 296 of 2024, WPC No. 300 of 2024, WPC No. 310 of 2024, WPC No. 316 of 2024, WPC No. 836 of 2024, WPC No. 320 of 2024, WPC No. 322 of 2024, WPC No. 145 of 2024, WPC No. 253 of 2024, WPC No. 47 of 2024, WPC No. 69 of 2024, WPC No. 284 of 2024, WPC No. 286 of 2024, WPC No. 287 of 2024, WPC No. 838 of 2024, WPC No. 840 of 2024, WPC No. 843 of 2024, WPC No. 844 of 2024, WPC No. 847 of 2024, WPC No. 848 of 2024, WPC No. 455 of 2024, WPC No. 456 of 2024, WPC No. 457 of 2024, WPC No.458 of 2024, WPC No. 459 of 2024, WPC No. 461 of 2024, WPC No. 462 of 2024, WPC No. 466 of 2024, WPC No. 472 of 2024, WPC No. 473 of 2024, WPC No. 503 of 2024, WPC No. 504 of 2024, WPC No. 506 of 2024, WPC No. 474 of 2024, WPC No. 477 of 2024, WPC No. 478 of 2024, WPC No. 488 of 2024, WPC No. 492 of 2024, WPC No. 493 of 2024, WPC No. 496 of 2024, WPC No. 497 of 2024, WPC No. 498 of 2024, WPC No. 501 of 2024, WPC No. 502 of 2024, WPC No. 874 of 2024, WPC No. 876 of 2024, WPC No. 877 of 2024, WPC No. 881 of 2024, WPC No. 882 of 2024, WPC No. 884 of 2024, WPC No. 885 of 2024, WPC No. 887 of 2024, WPC No. 889 of 2024, WPC No. 890 of 2024, WPC No. 891 of 2024, WPC No. 892 of 2024, WPC No. 893 of 2024, WPC No. 895 of 2024, WPC No. 898 of 2024, WPC No. 782 of 2024, WPC No. 742 of 2024, WPC No. 507 of 2024, WPC No. 508 of 2024, WPC No. 510 of 2024, WPC No. 511 of 2024, WPC No. 512 of 2024, WPC No. 513 of 2024 WPC No. 516 of 2024, WPC No. 517 of 2024, WPC No. 518 of 2024, WPC No. 518 of 2024, WPC No. 520 of 2024, WPC No. 522 of 2024, WPC No. 523 of 2024, WPC No. 524 of 2024, WPC No. 525 of 2024, WPC No. 531 of 2024, WPC No. 532 of 2024, WPC No. 533 of 2024, WPC No. 588 of 2024, WPC No. 589 of 2024, WPC No. 568 of 2024, WPC No. 570 of 2024, WPC No. 577 of 2024, WPC No. 578 of 2024, WPC No. 579 of 2024, WPC No. 583 of 2024, WPC No. 586 of 2024, WPC No. 663 of 2024, WPC No. 666 of 2024, WPC No. 669 of 2024, WPC No. 660 of 2024, WPC No. 661 of 2024, WPC No. 653 of 2024, WPC No. 657 of 2024, WPC No. 659 of 2024, WPC No. 645 of 2024, WPC No. 647 of 2024, WPC No. 648 of 2024, WPC No. 779 of 2024, WPC No. 781 of 2024, WPC No. 793 of 2024, WPC No. 794 of 2024, WPC No. 795 of 2024, WPC No. 802 of 2024, WPC No. 808 of 2024, WPC No. 809 of 2024, WPC No. 814 of 2024, WPC No. 815 of 2024, WPC No. 821 of 2024, WPC No. 850 of 2024, WPC No. 851 of 2024, WPC No. 855 of 2024, WPC No. 856 of 2024, WPC No. 863 of 2024, WPC No. 868 of 2024, WPC No. 870 of 2024, WPC No. 872 of 2024, WPC No. 873 of 2024, WPC No. 676 of 2024, WPC No. 677 of 2024, WPC No. 679 of 2024, WPC No. 688 of 2024, WPC No. 689 of 2024, WPC No. 692 of 2024, WPC No. 699 of 2024, WPC No. 700 of 2024, WPC No. 701 of 2024, WPC No. 708 of 2024, WPC No. 709 of 2024, WPC No. 710 of 2024, WPC No. 713 of 2024, WPC No. 723 of 2024, WPC No. 724 of 2024, WPC No. 733 of 2024, WPC No. 734 of 2024, WPC No. 737 of 2024, WPC No. 743 of 2024, WPC No. 744 of 2024, WPC No. 748 of 2024, WPC No. 754 of 2024, WPC No. 755 of 2024, WPC No. 756 of 2024, WPC No. 759 of 2024, WPC No. 760 of 2024, WPC No. 764 of 2024, WPC No. 774 of 2024, WPC No. 780 of 2024, WPC No. 785 of 2024, WPC No. 788 of 2024, WPC No. 535 of 2024, WPC No. 538 of 2024, WPC No. 540 of 2024, WPC No. 542 of 2024, WPC No. 544 of 2024, WPC No. 546 of 2024, WPC No. 547 of 2024, WPC No. 548 of 2024, WPC No. 549 of 2024, WPC No. 550 of 2024, WPC No. 551 of 2024, WPC No. 552 of 2024, WPC No. 559 of 2024, WPC No. 327 of 2024, WPC No. 128 of 2024, WPC No. 328 of 2024, WPC No. 329 of 2024, WPC No. 325 of 2024, WPC No. 388 of 2024 WPC No. 43 of 2024, WPC No. 50 of 2024, WPC No. 56 of 2024, WPC No. 66 of 2024, WPC No. 68 of 2024, WPC No. 406 of 2024, WPC No. 401 of 2024, WPC No. 404 of 2024, WPC No. 405 of 2024, WPC No. 385 of 2024, WPC No. 386 of 2024, WPC No. 390 of 2024, WPC No. 391 of 2024, WPC No. 393 of 2024, WPC No. 394 of 2024, WPC No. 395 of 2024, WPC No. 396 of 2024, WPC No. 398 of 2024, WPC No. 399 of 2024, WPC No. 349 of 2024, WPC No. 350 of 2024, WPC No. 351 of 2024, WPC No. 352 of 2024, WPC No. 332 of 2024, WPC No. 333 of 2024, WPC No. 335 of 2024, WPC No. 336 of 2024, WPC No. 337 of 2024, WPC No. 339 of 2024, WPC No. 341 of 2024, WPC No. 344 of 2024, WPC No. 345 of 2024, WPC No. 346 of 2024, WPC No. 374 of 2024, WPC No. 376 of 2024, WPC No. 378 of 2024, WPC No. 383 of 2024, WPC No. 384 of 2024, WPC No. 366 of 2024, WPC No. 368 of 2024, WPC No.369 of 2024, WPC No. 370 of 2024, WPC No. 373 of 2024, WPC No. 355 of 2024, WPC No. 356 of 2024, WPC No. 360 of 2024, WPC No. 361 of 2024, WPC No. 362 of 2024, WPC No. 364 of 2024, WPC No. 1001 of 2024, WPC No. 1006 of 2024, WPC No. 1013 of 2024, WPC No. 995 of 2024, WPC No. 908 of 2024, WPC No. 954 of 2024, WPC No. 957 of 2024, WPC No. 962 of 2024, WPC No. 963 of 2024, WPC No. 970 of 2024, WPC No. 976 of 2024, WPC No. 977 of 2024, WPC No. 978 of 2024, WPC No. 979 of 2024, WPC No. 986 of 2024, WPC No. 987 of 2024, WPC No. 990 of 2024, WPC No. 991 of 2024, WPC No. 823 of 2024, WPC No. 419 of 2024, WPC No. 420 of 2024, WPC No. 421 of 2024, WPC No. 422 of 2024, WPC No. 415 of 2024, WPC No. 416 of 2024, WPC No. 417 of 2024, WPC No. 418 of 2024, WPC No. 411 of 2024, WPC No. 412 of 2024, WPC No. 413 of 2024, WPC No. 414 of 2024, WPC No. 407 of 2024, WPC No. 408 of 2024, WPC No. 409 of 2024, WPC No. 410 of 2024, WPC No. 453 of 2024, WPC No. 454 of 2024, WPC No. 451 of 2024, WPC No. 452 of 2024, WPC No. 449 of 2024, WPC No. 450 of 2024, WPC No. 441 of 2024, WPC No. 445 of 2024, WPC No. 446 of 2024, WPC No. 447 of 2024, WPC No. 434 of 2024, WPC No. 435 of 2024, WPC No. 436 of 2024, WPC No. 437 of 2024, WPC No. 423 of 2024, WPC No. 425 of 2024, WPC No. 426 of 2024, WPC No. 431 of 2024, WPC No. 433 of 2024, WPC No. 590 of 2024, WPC No. 597 of 2024, WPC No. 598 of 2024, WPC No. 599 of 2024, WPC No. 600 of 2024, WPC No. 602 of 2024, WPC No. 614 of 2024, WPC No. 611 of 2024 WPC No. 610 of 2024, WPC No. 605 of 2024, WPC No. 608 of 2024, WPC No. 615 of 2024, WPC No. 618 of 2024, WPC No. 619 of 2024, WPC No. 620 of 2024, WPC No. 621 of 2024, WPC No. 623 of 2024, WPC No. 627 of 2024, WPC No. 628 of 2024, WPC No. 630 of 2024, WPC No. 633 of 2024, WPC No. 634 of 2024, WPC No. 635 of 2024, WPC No. 636 of 2024, WPC No. 641 of 2024, WPC No. 642 of 2024.
Decided On : 07-03-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. S.C. Verma, Sr. Adv, assisted by Mr. Manharan Lal Sahu, Adv. Mr. Sunil Sahu, Adv., Mr. Ritesh Verma, Adv., Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel with Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advs, Mr. Parag Kotecha, Adv., Mr. Santosh Bharat, Adv., Mr. T. K. Jha, Adv., Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Adv., Mr. Vivek Verma, Adv., Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Adv., Mr. Tarkeshwar Nande, Adv., Mr. Awadh Tripathi & Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, Advs, Mr. J. A. Lohani, Adv., Mr. Adil Minhaj, Adv., Ms. Rajni Soren, Adv., Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Adv., Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv., Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Adv., Mr. Amir Khan, Adv., and Mr. Pritam Singh, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Add. Adv. General, Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Adv. General, Mr. Malay Shrivastava and Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advs.

The court affirmed that non-elected Prescribed Officers can be removed without notice at the Registrar's discretion under the doctrine of pleasure, and did not possess substantive rights to retain office indefinitely.

Headnote:(A) Chhattisgarh Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 - Section 49(8) - Chhattisgarh Co-Operative Societies Rules, 1962 - Rule 43-B - Removal of Prescribed Officers - Petitioners, appointed as non-official Prescribed Officers due to delayed elections, were removed under Rule 43-B(3) by the Deputy Registrar - Court found the removal to be within the powers of the Registrar, as no specific tenure was established for their appointments - No violation of principles of natural justice was found since removal was not stigmatic and due process was not required in this case. (Paras 39, 46, 52)

(B) Prescribed Officers - Statutory rights - Petitioners argued that their removal was illegal due to absence of procedural fairness - Court held that since petitioners were not elected officials, they had no substantive rights to continue in office indefinitely - Removal was purely at the pleasure of the government. (Paras 44, 51, 52)

(C) Elections for Co-Operative Societies - No elections were held for over a year, prompting government to act - Court highlighted the statutory duty of societies to conduct elections and confirmed that the State cannot be blamed for the delays. (Paras 38, 52)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners were removed from their positions as Prescribed Officers after the political climate changed, following an announcement from the government canceling political appointments. They contended that their removal violated statutory provisions and lacked due process.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Registrar's authority to remove the petitioners without providing notice, determining that the removal was lawful and within the Registrar's powers under the relevant laws.

Issues: 1. Did the petitioners possess any substantive rights to retain their positions? 2. Was the removal of the petitioners lawful under the relevant provisions?

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that elected officials possess rights that can not be infringed, while appointed non-officials can be removed without procedural safeguards, characterizing their positions under the doctrine of pleasure.

Result: Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. removal of members from co-operative societies. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments against removal based on statutory non-compliance. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10)
3. argument regarding lack of substantive rights. (Para 8 , 9)
4. interpretation of applicable statutes and rules. (Para 11 , 13 , 18)
5. power and authority of the registrar in regard to removals. (Para 12 , 16 , 17)
6. court's legal interpretation of rights. (Para 14 , 15)
7. nature of removal powers under rules. (Para 19)
8. summary of judicial findings. (Para 20 , 21)
9. process of handling elections in co-operative societies. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
10. legal conclusions regarding removal and rights of petitioners. (Para 49 , 50 , 51)
11. final dismissal of petitions without costs. (Para 52 , 53)

ORDER :

Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.

1. The above captioned Writ Petitions are directed against the order of removal issued by the Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies in the month of December, 2023, in the exercise of the power conferred under Rule 43-B (3) of the Chhattisgarh Co-Operative Societies Rules, 1962 (for short, the Rules, 1962), whereby the petitioners who were earlier nominated/appointed as Prescribed Officers, have been removed from their Office.

2. The petitioners are members of various Co-Operative Societies/Primary Co- Operative Committees and they were appointed as Prescribed Officers at their respective societies pursuant to the order issued by the competent authority.

3. The facts of the present case are that the petitioners were appointed/nominated as Prescribed Officers of their respective Societies in accordance with the provisions contemplated under Section 49(8) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (henceforth ‘Act, 1960’) and sub-rule 4(a) of Rule 43-B of the Rules, 1962 in the year 2022. The petitioners are Prescribed Officers (non-official) of the respective societies. They took charge as Prescribed Officers pursuant to the order issued by the Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies. They were discharging their functions with utmost sincerity and honesty and there were no complaints against them. On 15.12.2023, after the change in the political scenario in the State, a notification was issued by the State Government to cancel all the political appointments/nominations, except the nominations/appointments which cannot be cancelled due to statutory compulsion. The Deputy Registrar of the Co-Operative Societies issued orders for the removal of the petitioners, who were nominated/appointed as Prescribed Officers. The petitioners have challenged the decision of the State and the orders passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies.

4. Mr. S.C. Verma, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioners would lead the arguments and submit that no election was held in the Co-Operative Societies/ Primary Co-Operative Committees for the last 6 years and the State Officials were appointed as Prescribed Officers and they did not take any steps to conduct the elections and thereafter, the petitioners were nominated/appointed as Prescribed Officers of the respective Co-operative Societies/Primary Co-Operative Committees. He would further submit that as no elections were conducted by the State Government, the petitioners could not have been replaced by Official Prescribed Officers from their respective Offices. It is further argued that the respondents have no power to issue an order of removal when no power has been conferred by the Statute to modify, alter, vary or rescind the nominations/appointments of the petitioners. It is also submitted that the petitioners were appointed/nominated as Prescribed Officers after the due scrutiny by the Screening Committee according to the scheme contemplated under Rule 43-B(3) of the Rules, 1962 and no power is vested with the Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies to remove the petitioners. It is argued that according to the language employed under the proviso to Rule 43-B (3) of the Rules,