Termination of employment without proper procedure violates natural justice; appointments not void ab initio if made with adherence to rules.

1O. P. No. 1869 of 1088 is by one petitioner and O. P. No. 2563 of 1988 is by 6 petitioners. The facts leading to the filing of these two original petitions are the same, the petitioners being persons appointed as Junior Clerks in the first respondent, which is a cooperative society of employees of the Indian Space Research Organisation, Trivandrum. I shall state the facts in O. P. No. 2563/88 inasmuch as the counter affidavit of the first respondent society is filed therein.

2 The first respondent society invited applications for the post of Junior Clerks as per a notification dated 13-5-1986. The petitioners were qualified for the post and applied for the same. The written test was conducted on 9-8-1986. The second respondent Joint Registrar was in charge of the conduct of the test, a fact which is not denied in the counter affidavit. The question papers were set, examination conducted and the papers valued by the second respondent. The petitioners were called for interview on 29-12-1986. They were selected and were appointed to the post on 19-3-1987.

3 The society is litigation prone and its affairs have led to a good crop of litigation in this court. The reason appears to be the rivalry between political factions to gain control over the management. One Murugan and one Ravi Varma had filed O. P. No. 4142 of 1986 inter alia to direct the Registrar of cooperative Societies and his subordinates to command the society to convene a special general body meeting of the society. There was an interim order passed by this court on 8-8-1986 on C. M. P. 18852 of 1986 by which the society was restrained from making further appointments pending the original petition. The original petition was disposed of by the judgment Ext. P1 dated 22-9-86. The parties agreed that the meeting, as prayed for, may be convened. There was difficulty only regarding the details, particularly the place where the meeting should be held. This court therefore, directed the society to convene the meeting after obtaining the requisite sanction from the authorities of the ISRO, as expeditiously as possible. It was further directed that the interim order passed by this Court on 8-8-1986 on C. M. P. 18852 of 1986 will continue to be in force till the special general meeting was convened. In other words, the direction was that there will be a restraint on fresh appointments till the special general meeting was convened. This order was clarified by the order Ext. P2 regarding the place where the meeting is to be convened, but that is not very relevant here.

4 The special general meeting was convened to be held on 8-3-1987. Immediately Murugan reached this Court with a fresh writ petition O. P. No. 1951 of 1987 for a direction to convene a special general body meeting to discuss a motion of no confidence moved by him and others against the members of the managing committee, and for other reliefs; This petition came on for preliminary hearing on 6th March 1987, when the society took notice and was agreeable to have the no confidence motion considered with top priority at the meeting to be held on 8-3-1987. This was recorded. There was a request made on behalf of the petitioner Murugan for direction to the Joint Registrar to be present at the meeting so that the proceedings may be carried on in a proper and orderly manner There was no opposition to this request. Accordingly the writ petition was disposed of recording the undertaking of the society to have the no confidence motion considered at the meeting on 8-3-1987, with a direction that the Joint Registrar or any other officer nominated by him will attend the meeting on 8-3-1987.

5 The special general body meeting had been convened to consider various matters, particularly a proposal to amend the bye laws of the society, to extend the term of the managing committee from three years to five years. The meeting took place on 8-3-1987, with conflicting versions as to what happened on that day. According to the petitioners the