M.C. JAIN, Actg. C.J.—This special appeal u/sec. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated May 14, 1985 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and he set aside the order of the Rajasthan State Co-operative Tribunal, Jaipur dated 15.11.1975 and remanded the case back of the said Tribunal to decide the appeal filed by respondent no. 3 Shri N.K. Tyagi against the order dated 16.2.1971 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bharatpur Zone, Bharatpur on merits in accordance with law.

2. A few facts may briefly be noticed.

3. The petitioner respondent no. 3 was appointed as Manager of the Sawai Madhopur Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd. vide order dated October 23, 1961. The Chairman of the Society suspended him on 16.1.1969 and thereafter he was served with a charge-sheet dated 1.3.1969. Thereafter without any enquiring into the alleged misconduct of the petitioner his services were terminated by the appellant society vide its order dated April 26, 1969. According to the petitioner the order of suspension, as well as the order of termination of the petitioners services were illegal and void. So the petitioner raised a dispute u/sec. 75. of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (for short the Act) against the termination of his service before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur. The Registrar referred the dispute to the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies of the Bharatpur Zone, Bharatpur. Reply to the reference was filed by the respondent society on 17.9.1969. The Deputy Registrar held that the dispute raised by the petitioner is a dispute touching the management of the Society so the dispute is not maintainable. However on merits he found that the order of termination is not bad so the reference was decided against the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal u/sec. 123 of the Act against the order of the Deputy Registrar before the Tribunal. The appellant society raised a preliminary objection that the reference was not maintainable as the dispute is not a dispute which touches the management of the Co-operative society. The Tribunal upheld the preliminary objection and it was held that the dispute between the employee and employer cannot be tried by the Registrar and consequently the appeal is not maintainable for want of jurisdiction. Review petition was also filed, the same was also dismissed by the Tribunal by its order dated 17.4.1976. The petitioner thereafter filed a writ petition, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the Tribunal and held that the dispute touches the management of the society and as such the reference was maintainable u/sec. 75 of the Act and consequently the* matter was sent back by the learned Single Judge to the Tribunal for decision on merits in accordance with law. Dissatisfied with the order of the learned Single Judge this special appeal has been filed.

4. We have heard Shri B.K. Pathak, learned counsel for the appellant Marketing Society and Shri B.L. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner respondent No. 3.

5. Shri B.K. Pathak, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge seriously erred in holding that the dispute of the nature in question "touches the management of the society" and the reference u/sec. 75 is maintainable. This view of the learned Single Judge expressing that the view taken by their lordships of the Supreme Court in the Gujarat State Go-operative Land Development Bank Ltd., vs. P.R. Mankad (1) expressing that section 75 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act was not brought to the notice of their lordships of the Supreme Court which section fell under the Chapter relating to the management of the society and as such their lordships of the Supreme Court resorted to grammatical meaning of word management if Section 75 of the Act was brought to the notice they ma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document