SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Ori) 453

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.K.MOHAPATRA, J.
Anam Charan Mahala – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 36272 of 2022
Decided On : 18-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Kshirod Kumar Rout
For the Respondents: A.K. Mishra, S.N. Das, Sougat Dash

The appointment of the Chief Executive Officer of a cooperative bank must be conducted by the Committee of Management in accordance with the provisions of the Odisha Cooperative Societies Act, 1962.

Headnote:(A) Odisha Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 - Section 28(3-b)(1) - Bye-Laws of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Limited - Appointment of Chief Executive Officer - Advertisement for recruitment issued by the State Government challenged on grounds of legality and authority, as it contravenes provisions of O.C.S. Act and Bye-Laws. Court finds the Practice of Government appointing Managing Director illegal; the appointment authority lies with the Committee, subject to Registrars approval. (Paras 4, 6, 11, 13, 16)

(B) Authority of Appointment - Committee of Management possesses exclusive authority to appoint Managing Director. State, in absence of the committee, cannot unilaterally issue advertisement. (Para 13)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition filed to quash recruitment advertisement for Chief Executive Officer of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank by the State-Opposite Parties, was contested on grounds of violating O.C.S. Act and the Bye-Laws regulating the appointment authority.

Findings of Court:
The appointment process must be rectified and returned to the Committee of Management for adherence to the established Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

Issues: The court addressed the legality and authority in issuing the recruitment advertisement under the current governance of the Bank.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Committee of Management is the rightful authority to appoint a Chief Executive Officer, and any deviation is deemed illegal.

Result: Writ petition disposed of, directing the matter back to the Committee for proper resolution.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's challenge to advertisement legality (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments over appointment authority (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
3. court analysis on appointment procedure (Para 11 , 13 , 14)
4. remand to committee of management (Para 15)
5. directive for compliance with laws and resolution (Para 16 , 17)

ORDER :

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. Heard Mr. K.K. Rout, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner; Mr. Amiya Kumar Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate along with Mr. S.N. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties and Sri Sougat Dash, learned counsel appearing for the Intervener. Perused the pleadings of the parties as well as materials placed before this Court for consideration.

3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner describing himself to be a primary member of Kendrapara Printing and Publishing Cooperative Society Limited and he was elected uncontested as a member of the committee, seeking for issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the advertisement under Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

4. The advertisement under Annexure-1 reveals that the Government of Odisha, Cooperation Department has published an advertisement for recruitment of Chief Executive Officer (Managing Director) of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Ltd. Under the aforesaid advertisement, applications were invited from eligible and desirable candidates and the last date of submission of application was 22.12.2022. The said advertisement has been published under the signature of the Additional Secretary to Government of Odisha, Cooperation Department. Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks to assail the advertisement under Annexure-1 on the principle ground that the advertisement issued under signature of the Additional Secretary to Government of Odisha of the Cooperation Department is illegal and the same is not supported by either by the Bye-Laws of the Bank or the Odisha Cooperative Societies Act. He further contended that in view of the provision contained in Section-28(3-b)(1) of the Odisha Cooperative Society Act, 1962, the Chief Executive Officer of the Bank is to be appointed on whole time basis by the Committee subject to the approval of the Registrar.

5. The Bye-Laws of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Limited which has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3 under the heading ‘Officers’ and on Clause- 41(iii)(a) also provides that the Managing Director of the Bank shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the Bank who shall be subject to the overall control of the Committee. It is also provides the qualification of the Chief Executive Officer shall be such as may be stipulated by the National Bank in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India and is to be appointed by the Managing Committee subject to approval of the Registrar under the provision of the O.C.S. Act and Rules.

6. Mr. Rout, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner referring to the provisions contained in O.C.S. Act, 1962 as well as the Bye-Laws of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Limited in Claue-41(iii)(a), contended before this Court that State Government has no authority to issue the advertisement and, accordingly, they cannot be appointed the Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of the Bank. Such an attempt by the State-Opposite Parties in issuing the advertisement, according to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, is contrary not only the provisions of the O.C.S. as well as the Bye-Laws of the Bank. Accordingly, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition with a prayer to quash the advertisement under Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

7. M. A.K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate along with Mr. S.N. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, referring to the counter affidavit filed by the State-Opposite Parties, submits that it is an undisp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top