Back
2014 Supreme(Manipur) 34
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
Laxmi Kanta Mohapatra, N.Kosiwar Singh, JJ.
L. Gojendra Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operation - Resopndent
W.P.(C) No. 364 of 2007
Decided On : 30-01-2014
For the Appellant :Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Ch. Momon Singh, Advocate
The judgment establishes the criteria for determining whether an entity is an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12, emphasizing financial, functional, and administrative control by the government.
Headnote:
Opportunity of Hearing - Termination of Service - Article 12 - Ajay Hasia & Ors. -vs- Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors., (1981) 1 SCC 722; Pradeep Kumar Biswas - Vs - Indian Institute of Chemical Biology & Ors, (2002) 5 SCC 111; Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Ors. -Vs - Union of India & Ors. (2005) 4 SCC 649; Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vrs - Partha Sarathi Sen Roy, (2013) 8 SCC 345
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenges the legality of the termination of his service by the respondent. The petitioner was appointed as a Project Officer and was terminated without a hearing.
Finding of the Court:
The court examined whether the National Co-operative Union of India (NCUI) is an 'Authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It held that NCUI is not an 'authority' and is not amenable to writ jurisdiction.
Issues: Legality of termination without a hearing, Maintainability of the writ application against NCUI as a private body
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the definition of 'Authority' under Article 12 and referred to various decisions to determine the status of NCUI. It concluded that NCUI is not an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12.
Final Decision: The writ application challenging the termination was dismissed as the court held that NCUI is not amenable to writ jurisdiction.
L.K. Mohapatra, Actg. C.J.
The petitioner in this writ application questions the legality of the order dated 4.6.2003 passed by the respondent no. 3 terminating his service. The National Co-operative Union of India (for short ’NCUI’) issued an advertisement for appointment of a Project Officer in the year 1999 and petitioner was one of the several applicants for appointment to such post. He was subjected to recruitment test and on the recommendation of the Selection Committee, he was appointed as a Project Officer in NCUI Co-operative Education Field Project, Bishnupur in the State of Manipur vide office order dated 19th July, 1999 and continued to hold such post till the order of termination was passed by the respondents on 4.6.2003. The impugned order of termination in Annexure-A/9 is quoted below:
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE UNION OF INDIA
(APEX ORGANISATION OF THE INDIAN COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT)
Date:
June 4, 2003
NCUI/AA/ESTT/Po/Bishnupur/03
OFFICE ORDER
Inspite of many warning issued from time to time to Sh. L.G. Singh, Project Officer, NCUI Coop.Edn.Field Project, Bishnupur, he has not shown any improvement in his performance as Project Officer. It has been decided by the competent authority to terminate the services of Sh. L.G. Singh, Project Officer, NCUI Coop.Education Field Project, Bishnupur with immediate effect.
Sd/-
(D.P. Neb)
Sr. Consultant
2. It is the case of the petitioner that since the order of termination is attached with a stigma, opportunity of hearing should have been given to him and admittedly no opportunity of hearing having been given to him before the impugned order was passed, the said order of termination is not sustainable in law.
3. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the respondents 2 to 4 with regards to the maintainability of the writ application. It is stated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the above respondents that NCUI is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and as such the writ is not maintainable against a private body. In answer to the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents, it was submitted by Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the NCUI is discharging public duty and as such it is an "Authority" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the writ application is maintainable.
4. Before entering into the merits of the case, it is necessary to examine as to whether the NCUI is a "State" or "Authority" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. In order to examine this question, it is not only necessary to look into the bye-laws of NCUI but also several decisions cited by the learned counsel appearing for both parties.
4.1. The law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ajay Hasia & Ors. -vs- Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors., reported in (1981) 1 SCC 722 is that the test for determining as to whether an "Authority" falls within the definition of "State" in Article 12 is whether it is an instrumentality or agency of the Government. It is immaterial whether the corporation is created by a statute or under a statute. The concept of instrumentality or agency of the Government is not limited to a corporation created by a statute but is equally applicable to a company or society and in a given case it would have to be decided, on a consideration of the relevant factors, whether the company or society is an instrumentality or agency of the Government so as to come within the meaning of the expression ’authority’ in Article 12. Applying the above principles, the Supreme Court in the said case held that even though the administration and management of the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, is under the control of a society registered under the J & K Registration of Societies Act, it is an instrumentality or agency of the State and the Central Government and is an "Authority" within the meaning of Article 12. While coming to such concl
