Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Sandeep Sharma, J.
The Sanot Cooperative Agriculture Service Society - Petitioner
Versus
Joint Registrar (Credit) Cooperative Societies and others - Respondents
CMPMO No. 274 of 2022
Decided On : 09-12-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 227 - Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society Rules - Rule 21, 4 - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 2-A, 9(1), 10 - Services - Forced Resignation - Challenge to order passed by respondent No.1, whereby appeal preferred by respondent No. 3 has been allowed and Resolution passed by petitioner society, thereby accepting resignation tendered by respondent No.3, from post of Salesman in society has been set aside – Resignation was not ‘voluntary’ but on account of harassment, as is evident from note given in resignation - Para 10.
Finding of the Court:
In decision of Karnataka High Court (cited supra), Court was considering phraseology "otherwise terminates services" used in S. 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - A similar phraseology is used in S. 9(1) of Act – Court is in agreement with view taken by Karnataka High Court in the decision cited supra – Court is supported in this view also by an old decision by Additional Judicial Commissioner in Abraham Reuben v. Karachi which has relied upon an English decision in Stephenson v. London Joint Stock Bank Ltd. – Court therefore, hold that phraseology "whose services are otherwise terminated" used in S. 9(1) of Act covers cases of forced resignation and, therefore, in such matters, an employee can move Tribunal under S. 9(1) of Act.
Result: Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
By way of present petition filed under Art.227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner society has laid challenge to order dated 13.6.2022 passed by respondent No.1, whereby appeal preferred by the respondent No. 3 has been allowed and Resolution No. 1(2), dated 1.4.2022 passed by the petitioner society, thereby accepting the resignation dated 31.3.2022 tendered by respondent No.3, from the post of Salesman in society has been set aside
2. For having bird’s eye view of the matter, relevant facts may be summed up thus. Respondent No.3 Kamal Nain, who was working as a Salesman in petitioner Society since 8.3.2010, tendered a resignation on 31.3.2022 to the President of the society, thereby resigning from the post of Salesman (Annexure P-2). In the end, the respondent No.3 specifically stated that “Mujhe mansik taur se pareshan kiya jar aha hai, jis karan, mein apni naukdi chhod raha hoon.” Accordingly, vide resolution No. 1(2) dated 1.4.2022 passed by the Managing Committee of the petitioner society, the resignation was accepted. Later on, respondent No.3 files an appeal under Clause 21 of the Compendium of Instructions and Working Guidelines issued by Registrar Cooperative Societies, Himachal Pradesh, against the Resolution dated 1.4.2022, on the ground that the resignation tendered by him was not ‘voluntary’ but under duress and as such, same amounts to ‘termination of service’.
3. Petitioner society contested the appeal filed by the respondent No.3 before Registrar Cooperative Societies vide its reply (Annexure P- 5), mainly on the ground that the appeal is not maintainable in view of the fact that the said remedy is only available, if services of a Cooperative Society are terminated or he is dismissed and in the case at hand, respondent No.3 tendered his resignation from the post of Salesman. Besides this, it is averred that the respondent No.3 is habitual of creating problems in the society and has filed various false complaints and also instigated his family to file complaints against the society. Respondent No.1 i.e. Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies Dehra also filed its reply to the appeal and prayed for dismissal of appeal.
4. The appeal filed by respondent No.3 before Registrar Cooperative Societies was further entrusted to respondent No.1, who vide impugned order dated 13.6.2022 allowed the appeal and set aside resolution dated 1.4.2022, against which the petitioner has approached this Court, mainly on the ground that remedy of appeal under Rule 21 of the Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society Rules before Registrar Cooperative Societies is available to an aggrieved person, only in case of termination or dismissal from service. Reference has been made by the petitioner to a decision rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s New Victoria Mills and others v. Shrikant Arya, Civil Appeal No. 5685 of 2021, decided on 27.9.2021 to enure its argument that the resignation once accepted, cannot be withdrawn.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.3, Mr. Atharv Sharma, argued that the petitioner society has initiated selection process for the post of Assistant Secretary, against which the respondent No.3 filed an appeal before Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, who allowed the appeal, which was further challenged by the petitioner society before Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies, Dharamshala, which was allowed. resultantly, the respondent No.3 has filed CWP No. 218 of 2022, which is pending adjudication before this court. He also referred to complaint filed by the respondent No.3 against petitioner society against alleged harassment, in which enquiry is stated to have been initiated and report has been submitted by Enquiry Officer i.e. Inspector Co-operative Societies. Mr. Sharma argued that the petitioner society has left no stone unturned to harass the respondent No.3 and now the petitioner society has engaged a close relative of Secretary. Main stress o
SupremeToday
Resignation means spontaneous relinquishment of one's own right and in relation to an office, it connotes act of giving up or relinquishing office.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the resignation was voluntary, the sexual harassment complaint lacked nexus with the resignation, and the acceptance of the resignation severe....
A resignation must be unconditional and comply with procedural requirements; failure to do so renders it invalid.
Non-communication of acceptance of resignation does not invalidate the resignation, and the resignation becomes effective on its acceptance, even if the acceptance is not communicated, as long as the....
A resignation cannot be withdrawn after its acceptance.
A resignation accepted unconditionally cannot be withdrawn unilaterally, and a suit for declaration regarding continuation in service is not maintainable if the employee is not classified as a workma....
An employee cannot withdraw his resignation after it has been accepted by the employer.
A resignation tendered by an employee voluntarily, unless accepted, cannot bring an end to the employment contract, as per Clause 20 of the employment contract and Rule 36 of the Gujarat Civil Servic....
The court held that resignations cannot be accepted while disciplinary proceedings are pending, affirming the principle that withdrawal of resignation restores continuity of service.
A resignation from government service is effective only upon acceptance by the appointing authority, and the employer has the right to reject it if conditions for resignation are not met.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
