Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
J.J. MUNIR, J.
Dinesh Chand Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ (A) No. 10601 of 2023
Decided On : 19-10-2023
Dismissal from Service - U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 - Regulations of 2020 - Chapter VII Regulation 36(c) of the Uttar Pradesh Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Centralized Service Rules, 1978
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, was dismissed from service following a dispute between two Cadre Secretaries. The petitioner challenged the dismissal through a departmental appeal, which resulted in the dismissal being set aside. However, the petitioner was not reinstated, leading to a second dismissal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dismissal was not justified as the departmental proceedings did not adhere to a fair and reasonable procedure. The court quashed the dismissal order and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner and pay him salary from the date of the judgment.
Issues: The issues included biased disciplinary proceedings, lack of evidence in the dismissal order, and failure to conduct a fair departmental enquiry.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dismissal order was not based on a valid departmental enquiry and did not adhere to the principles of a fair procedure. The court emphasized the need for the establishment to prove charges through evidence and conduct a just and reasonable enquiry.
Final Decision: The court quashed the dismissal order, issued a mandamus to reinstate the petitioner, and directed the respondents to pay the petitioner's salary from the date of the judgment. The court also provided guidance for the respondents to proceed afresh with the disciplinary proceedings.
JUDGMENT :
J.J. MUNIR, J.
1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.05.2023, notifying a decision of the Board of Directors/Committee of Management, Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Chaudhera, Block Pahasu, District Bulandshahr, signed by the Chairman and the Secretary of the said society, resolving to dismiss the petitioner from service.
2. The Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Chaudhera, Block Pahasu, District Bulandshahr (for short ‘the Society’) is a registered Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, registered under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (for short ‘the Act of 1965’). The service conditions of employees of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies are governed by regulations, known as U.P. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies Regulations, 2020, notified on 31.07.2020. These shall hereinafter be called, ‘the Regulations of 2020’.
3. The petitioner was a peon in the employ of the Society. According to a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Society, adopted in their meeting dated 22.10.2022, he was promoted to the post of an accountant. The petitioner thinks that he became the victim of a dispute between a Cadre Secretary, Yadram and another Banwari Lal Sharma, who was given additional charge of the Society vide order dated 22.11.2022 passed by the Member Secretary, District Administrative Committee Cooperatives, Bulandshahr.
4. Yadram, the Cadre Secretary instituted Writ (A) No. 20683 of 2022, questioning the additional charge of Secretary of the Society being given to Banwari Lal Sharma. The writ petition aforesaid was disposed of, substantially allowed, vide order dated 12.12.2022, in terms of the following orders:
Sri M.N. Mishra, learned counsel, on the basis of the instructions, says that Banwari Lal Sharma has only been given additional charge. He has not been made Cadre Secretary of the Society of the Block of which he is original resident.
This Court is of the opinion that additional charge also cannot be given to Banwari Lal Sharma. The order dated 22.11.2022 is quashed with liberty to the respondent no. 3 to pass a fresh order within a period of three weeks from today.
In the meantime, the petitioner has already been suspended by order dated 02.12.2022, he shall not be allowed to function but some other regularly appointed Cadre Secretary shall be given charge of the Society in question.”
5. The petitioner thinks that Banwari Lal Sharma came to believe that Yadram, the Cadre Secretary, who instituted Writ (A) No. 20683 of 2022 against the additional charge of the Society that Banwari Lal Sharma held, was set up by the petitioner. The petitioner says that on this account Banwari Lal Sharma, who is till date discharging duties of the Secretary in additional charge of the Society, got disciplinary proceedings instituted against the petitioner mala fide, and had him placed under suspension pending enquiry vide order dated 09.12.2022. A charge-sheet dated 12.12.2022 was issued to the petitioner carrying five charges, to which the petitioner filed a reply, which is on record as Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition.
6. It is the petitioner’s case that after submission of his reply to the charge-sheet, no proceedings were taken. It is averred in paragraph No. 13 that it is incorrectly mentioned that vide an order dated 21.12.2022, a last opportunity was give
The main legal point established is that departmental proceedings must adhere to a fair and reasonable procedure, including the establishment's burden to prove charges through evidence and the requir....
A disciplinary inquiry must follow procedural fairness, including the establishment's burden to prove charges through evidence, especially when major penalties are at stake.
A fair inquiry process is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and failure to adhere to procedural requirements can invalidate dismissal orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to conduct a proper departmental enquiry, especially in cases involving major penalties, violates the principles of natural justic....
Procedural violations in disciplinary proceedings render removal orders arbitrary and unenforceable, emphasizing the need for fair conduct in evidence presentation.
(1) Dismissal – [Departmental charge-sheet is not a plaint that an evasive reply thereto may amount to admission – In a departmental enquiry, unless charge is admitted, burden to prove charge lies on....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the recovery of dues from a retired employee and the continuation of a departmental enquiry after retirement must be in accordance with the ap....
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
