PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) PRESENT petition filed on 12th July, 2001 challenges the order dated 17. 12. 1998 passed by respondent No. 3, who is the Secretary of respondent No. 1, Harijan Sewak Sangh, terminating the services of the petitioner. Respondent No. 1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It was incorporated following a Resolution passed by Members belonging to the Hindu Community on 25. 9. 1932. The Resolution records that it would be the duty of Hindu leaders to secure by legitimate and peaceful means an early removal of all social disabilities within the Hindu Community imposed by custom on the so-called untouchable classes.- A laudable object indeed.

( 2 ) AS per the constitution of the Society, the stated object of the Society is eradication, by truthful and non-violence means, untouchability in Hindu Society with all evils and disabilities suffered by the so-called untouchables, commonly referred to in societies as Harijans.

( 3 ) AN executive authority called the Central Board stands constituted under the Memorandum of Incorporation of the Society. This Board consists of a President, Vice-President (S), Secretary (S) and Treasurer. Since Regional or State Boards were contemplated to be set up in course of time, Presidents of the Regional Boards are also the ex-officio members of the Board. In addition, 15 members, to be appointed by the President of the Society would also be on the Central board.

( 4 ) THE Society is competent to acquire and hold movable and immovable property. Any person who subscribes to the object of the Society is entitled to become its member.

( 5 ) THE memorandum of incorporation and the bye-laws of the society do not reveal any governmental control in the affairs or the management of the society. There is no government nominee on the board. The government has nothing to do with the incorporation of the society or in running the affairs of the society. It is purely a private body incorporated by Hindus. Of course, object of the society, being removal of untouchability is a laudable social purpose. No monitory consideration towards the corpus of the society came from the Government.

( 6 ) PETITIONER was employed by the society on 21. 7. 1981. His appointment was as a B. K. M. Worker. (Terms of appointment have not been filed by the petitioner ).

( 7 ) ON 13. 3. 1982, petitioner was promoted to the post of Programme Organizer with effect from 8. 1. 1982. Appointment was for a period of one year. It was indicated that if the scheme, viz. "b. K. M. Programme" was continued for the year 1982-83, candidature of the petitioner for selection to the said post would be considered. Programme was continued. Petitioner continued to function as Programme Organizer.

( 8 ) ON 11. 5. 1990, the respondent decided to have an Internal Auditor. On 27. 7. 1991, petitioner was appointed as an Internal Auditor. On 1. 4. 1991, services of the petitioner were confirmed as an internal auditor.

( 9 ) PETITIONER continued to work as an Internal Auditor.

( 10 ) PETITIONER alleges that he noticed serious financial irregularities which was not to the liking of the management and he sensed that his services would be terminated. Petitioner claims to have addressed a letter to the Members of the Board on 4. 9. 1997. Petitioner claims that he sent the said letter under Certificate of Posting. Petitioner alleges that his fears came to be well founded, evidenced by the fact that by the impugned order dated 17. 12. 1998, his services were terminated.

( 11 ) ORDER dated 17. 12. 1998 reads as under:-

"shri Vinay Kumar Tyagi was asked vide this Office Memo No. 118. 07/98-99 1058 dated 1. 12. 98 to show cause within 7 days, why he should not be removed from service. The charges against him were that (1) he had been refused leave and asked to join hi duties vide this office memo No. 107. 00/98-99/755, dated 2. 9. 98 but he did not join his duties and applied for further extension of leave which was also refu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document