IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)
DEVENDRA KUMAR ARORA, J.
Bharat Bhusan and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 1306, 1369 and 1371 (SS) of 2012
Decided On : 01-11-2018
Appointment - Challenge to order rejecting representations of petitioners - U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, Regulation 5 of U.P. Co-operative Employees Service Regulations, 1975, Regulation 15(1) of U.P. Cooperative Federal (Business) Regulations, 1976, Section 2(a-4) of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, Secretary, State of Karnataka & others Vs. Umadevi & others 2006 (4) SCC 1, Union Public Service Commission Vs. Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela 2006 (2) SCC 482
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the rejection of their representations by the Managing Director, U.P. Co-operative Union Limited, on the ground that their services automatically ended after the expiry of the term in their appointment letter. The petitioners argued that their services were extended after the initial term and that the rejection was based on a wrong premise.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners failed to point out infringement of any constitutional or statutory right, and therefore dismissed the writ petitions.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, U.P. Co-operative Employees Service Regulations, 1975, and U.P. Cooperative Federal (Business) Regulations, 1976, in relation to the appointment and termination of the petitioners' services.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners had no legal right for continuance in service unless their appointment was made in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. It emphasized the need for regular appointments to be made in compliance with the constitutional and statutory mandates, including the requirement for issuing advertisements and holding proper selections.
Final Decision: The writ petitions lacked merit and were dismissed by the court.
ORDER :
Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora, J.
1. Heard Sri Alok Mishra, learned Counsel for petitioners and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing for U.P. Co-operative Union Limited (opposite party No. 2).
2. In all the aforesaid writ petitions common question is involved, therefore, they have been clubbed together and are being decided by a common order.
3. Petitioners have approached this Court challenging the order dated 12.10.2011 passed by the Managing Director, U.P. Co-operative Union Limited, whereby the representations of petitioners have been rejected on the ground that after expiry of term as shown in their appointment letter, services of petitioners have automatically come to an end. In the impugned order, it has also been observed that appointment of petitioners were made in contravention of the provisions of Regulation 5 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Employees Service Regulations, 1975.
4. Submission of learned Counsel for petitioners is that petitioners were appointment on temporary basis in between 2008 to 2010 for a specific period i.e. 89 days but after expiry of the said period, their services were extended from time to time. In the meantime, the services of petitioners were terminated orally which was questioned by the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 5368 (SS) of 2011, Writ Petition No. 1973 (SS) of 2011 and Writ Petition No. 2592 (SS) of 2011. All these writ petitions were disposed of vide order dated 05.09.2011 with a direction to the Managing Director, U.P. Co-operative Federal Authority to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders. In deference of the said court's order, representations preferred by petitioners were considered and rejected by the impugned order dated 12.10.2011.
5. It has been asserted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that under Regulation 15(1) of the U.P. Cooperative Federal (Business) Regulations, 1976, it is crystal clear that the terms and conditions of the appointments made by the Federal Authority will be governed by the provision contained in Regulations, 1976 itself as such there was neither any basis nor any justifiable reason to observed that service conditions of the petitioners are governed by the U.P. Cooperative Society Employee Service Rules, 1975. Therefore, the respondents had proceeded on a wrong premise while rejecting the representation of the petitioners, which has resulted into grave injustice.
6. Refuting the allegations of the petitioners, it has been urged on behalf of the contesting respondents that appointments were made for a fixed term without there being any advertisement and process of selection and de hors the Rules as the appointments were to be made strictly in accordance with Regulations 1975 or Regulations 1976. The Managing Director, U.P. Cooperative Union is ex-officio Chairman of the U.P. Co-operative Federal Authority and he can make regular appointment only after selection is made through the Board. It has also been asserted that simply for the reason that the posts are existing in the office of contesting respondents, it would not ipso facto creates a right in favour of the petitioners to be appointed on the post in question through back-door.
7. At the out set, it is relevant to mention that Section 2(a-4) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 deals with the Apex level societies. The U.P. Co-operative Union Limited, Lucknow is also a registered Apex level cooperative society as it names find place at item No. 5 of Section 2(a-4) of the Act. It may be added that in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 122 of the 1965 Act framed service regulations known as U.P. Co-operative Employees Service Regulations, 1975. The State Government constituted an authority known as U.P. Cooperative Institutional Service Board for recruitment, training and disciplinary control over the employees of Apex level societies. Regulation-5 of the 1975 Regulations deals with recruitment and says that recruitment for all posts in a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.