( 1 ) THE U. P. Co-operative Federation Ltd. , respondent No. 1, employed the petitioner Radha Charan Sharma on February 24, 1965 as a sales representative in its Co-operative Drug Factory at rani Khat. The appointment was for a period of 3 months only but he continued in service. In 1969, he was transferred as on accountant cum goodown keeper in the branch office of the Feder ation at Faizabad. Reports of theft of fertiliser and mis-appropriation of money and materials having been, received, the federation on August 29,-1969 served on the petitioner an order of suspension dated July 21, 1969 suspending the petitioner with immediate effect on payment of a subsistence allowance of 1/4 of his emoluments. This order was passed by the secretary of the federation.

( 2 ) SHRI Sharma, the petitioner, filed the present writ petition in July, 1972 praying that the order of suspension be quashed because it was passed mala fide and in violation of the statutory regulations. He further prayed that he be reinstated in his post.

( 3 ) WHEN the writ petition came up for hearing before a division Beach the respondents Counsel raised a preliminary objection that since the Federation was a private and non-statutory body and since the regulations framed by it were non statutory, the writ petition was not maintainable. Reliance was placed on a division Bench decision ia Devendra Pratap Singh v. District co-operative Bank Ltd. , Hardoi, W. P. No. 1106 of 1976 decided on September 12,1979. The Division Bench hearing the writ petition felt that the following question required determination 1 Whether a co-operative society which is an apex or state level co-operative society governed by the provisions of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act is a statutory body or is a "state" within the meaning of that expression in Article 12 of the constitution. 2 Whether the U. P. Co-operative Societies Employees regulations framed in exercise of the powers conferred under section 122 of the Act have the force of law 3 Whether the employees of such a co-operative society whose conditions of service are governed by the Regulations are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this court in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution alleging that the Co-operative society has violated any of the regulations or rules governing the service conditions ?

( 4 ) THE Division Bench felt that in view of the decision of this Court in Aley Ahmad Abidi v. District Inspector of Schools allahabad and others, AIR 1977 SC 589, and of the Supreme Court in Raman Daya Ram Shetty v. The International Airport Authority of India and others. AIR 1979 SC 1628, certain observations made by the Division Bench in Davendra Pratap Singh case (supra)required reconsideration. It accordingly referred the entire writ petition for hearing and decision by a larger Bench. That is how this matter has come before this Bench.

( 5 ) ON facts the position is that the U P. Co-operative fedration Ltd. , respondent No. 1, is a Co-operative Society registered under the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1. 912. It framed the U. P. Co-operative Federation Service Rules. They came into force from July 1, 1956. The allegation in Paragraph 3 of the w. P. that the Registrar Co-operative Societies and the U. P. State government framed these Service Rules under Sections 121 and 122 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1967 is incorrect annexure 1 to the W. P. is a copy of the rules. Sub rule (it) of Ruls 1 states that the rules shall be deemed to have come into force from July 1, 1956. The Co operative Societies Act was enacted in 1965. The rules could not hence be framed under Sections 121 and 122 of that Act. The clear cut averment in Paragraph 10 of tbe counter affidavit that three rules were not framed by the State government of the Registrar, but were framed by the Federation in the year 1956 appears to be correct. The contrary allegation in the writ petition or its reiteration in the rejoinder

Click Here to Read the rest of this document