A person appointed as a Prescribed Officer in a co-operative society holds a temporary position and does not have a vested right to continue; thus, their removal by the competent authority under statutory powers is not inherently arbitrary or a violation of natural justice.

Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRAsigned by JAT RAGHVENDRA JAT NAFR

Order on Board

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call entire records pertaining to the nomination as well as removal of the prescribed officer from the office of Commissioner Co-operative Society Mahasamund/Respondent no. 5, for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by quashing the order impugned dated 19.03.2026 (Annexure P-1) & 12.12.2025 (Annexure P-2).

10.3 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be please to direct the respondents authority to not disturb the petitioner till the election of the Board of Directors of the Co-operative Society and he may be permitted to work for the Society.

10.4 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the interest of justice.”

2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 19.03.2026 passed by respondent No. 4/Joint Registrar, Co-operative, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 12.12.2025, relating to his removal from the post of Prescribed Officer, has been dismissed, and simultaneously the appointment of respondent No. 6 as Prescribed Officer has been confirmed, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without following the procedure prescribed under the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and the Rules of 1962; that it is respectfully submitted that elections of co-operative societies across the State have been due since the year 2017–18, and the State Government as well as the Commissioner, Co-operative, have not taken any steps to conduct such elections, and consequently, the societies are being run by appointing Prescribed Officers, in which process the petitioner, along with others, was duly nominated to ensure smooth functioning of the society; that pursuant to order dated 14.11.2024 passed by the Committee constituted under Rule 43-B of the Rules, 1962, the petitioner was appointed as Prescribed Officer of Prathmik Krishi Sakh Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Ganjar, Registration No. 1514, and he assumed charge on 21.11.2024, during which tenure there was no complaint against him and the society achieved the objective of zero shortage at the procurement centre; that, however, abruptly and without any rhyme or reason, a proposal for his removal was passed by the Committee on 12.12.2025 and, on the same day, respondent No. 5 issued the order removing the petitioner from the said post, without considering that the petitioner had been appointed under Rule 43-B (4)(a) of the Rules, 1962 to continue till the election of the Board of Directors, which has not yet been conducted, and without declaring any election schedule, thereby rendering the action arbitrary and contrary to law; that aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No. 4, wherein an interim stay was granted on 17.12.2025 and notice was issued to respondent No. 5, who filed a reply relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court in WPC No. 33/2024, contending that the authority has power under Section 49(8) of the Act, 1960 to remove a Prescribed Officer; however, the learned Joint Registrar, without considering the grounds raised in the appeal and merely relying upon the said reply and judgment, dis