Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
The distinction between employee and member is crucial; employees are generally covered under statutory provisions and can challenge disciplinary actions, whereas members' rights are more related to membership and procedural fairness ["THE SPECIAL OFFICER vs T.R.MURUGAN - Madras"], ["V.Viswanathan vs The Joint Registrar of Co-Op - Madras"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["Gangatharan R J vs The Deputy Registrar of Coop - Madras"]- ["THE SPECIAL OFFICER vs T.R.MURUGAN - Madras"]- ["S.512 Vilangamudi Primary vs The Authority under Tamil Nadu - Madras"]- ["The Management vs The Authority Under the - Madras"]- ["PAYYANNUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.C 1556. vs LABOUR COURT KANNUR - Kerala"]- ["PAYYANNUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.C vs LABOUR COURT,KANNUR - Kerala"]- ["PAYYANNUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.C 1556. vs LABOUR COURT KANNUR - Kerala"]- ["Pothuri Subba Raju, S/o Satyanarayana Raju VS State of A. P. - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Pothuri Subba Raju, S/o Satyanarayana Raju VS State of A. P. , rep. by its Principal Secretary, Cooperative Department - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Brijesh Kumar Singh VS Central Registrar Co-Operative - Allahabad"]
In the realm of employment disputes, particularly in educational institutions or societies, employees often seek quick judicial intervention. But what if you're an employee and a member of a private society facing a charge memo for alleged misconduct? Can you rush to the High Court with a writ petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution? The short answer: generally no, especially if the society is private and unaided.
This article dives deep into the legal nuances, drawing from Supreme Court precedents and High Court rulings. We'll explore why such writs are typically non-maintainable, exceptions to watch for, and practical alternatives. Note: This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice. Consult a lawyer for your situation.
Can an employee as well as member of a society file a writ petition challenging a charge memo issued against him, the society fall under the definition of state?
A charge memo is the initial step in disciplinary proceedings, outlining allegations and seeking an explanation. Writ petitions under Article 226 are extraordinary remedies against 'State' actions (as defined under Article 12), typically for violations of fundamental rights or public law elements. Private employment disputes, however, often fall under contract law, not constitutional jurisdiction. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565
Private unaided societies, even those running educational institutions affiliated with CBSE, do not qualify as 'State' or its instrumentalities under Article 12. Despite performing public functions like education, their actions in service matters remain private.
The Supreme Court in St. Mary's Education Society clarified: while a private unaided minority institution might be touching the spheres of public function by performing a public duty, its employees have no right of invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of matters relating to service where they are not governed or controlled by the statutory provision. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565
CBSE affiliation doesn't change this: CBSE is only a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the school affiliated to it is not a creature of the statute and hence not a statutory body. Service rules in CBSE bye-laws are contractual, lacking statutory force. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565St. Mary’s Education Society VS Rajendra Prasad Bhargava - 2022 0 Supreme(SC) 848
Principles reiterated: It must be consequently held that while a body may be discharging a public function or performing a public duty and thus its actions becoming amenable to judicial review by a constitutional court, its employees would not have the right to invoke the powers of the High Court conferred by Article 226 in respect of matter relating to service where they are not governed or controlled by the statutory provisions. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565Dileep Kumar Pandey VS Union of India - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 891
Your dual role as employee-member doesn't add a public law element; it's still a service contract matter.
Charge memos initiate internal disciplinary processes without public nexus. Charge memos in private societies involve no public element: Even if a body performing public duty is amenable to the writ jurisdiction, all its decisions are not subject to judicial review. Only those decisions which have public element therein can be judicially reviewed under the writ jurisdiction. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565
Even against statutory bodies, writs against charge memos are barred unless there's jurisdictional defect or mala fides. Courts routinely refuse: Courts should not entertain a writ against a charge memo in a routine manner. E. K. Srinivasan VS Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Minerals Ltd. - 2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 3519
In St. Mary's context, termination or charge memos are basically a service contract without nexus to public duty. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565
This isn't limited to private entities. Even government employees can't challenge charge memos prematurely. Therefore, framing of charges itself would not provide a cause of action for entertaining a writ petition. However, a writ petition against the charge memo may be entertained on certain exceptional circumstances, where the charge memo has been issued by an incompetent Authority having no jurisdiction or allegation of mala fides is raised. G. Dhanalakshmi VS District Collector, Dindigul - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 1246
Another ruling: A charge memo can only be challenged on limited grounds, and judicial review is confined to the decision-making process. A writ petition challenging a charge sheet is not maintainable unless it infringes the rights of the party or is wholly without jurisdiction. P. Giridharan VS Tamil Nadu Minerals Ltd. - 2018 Supreme(Mad) 2342
Employees must participate in the enquiry; challenge the final order later.
Cooperative societies offer parallels. While some with deep State control (financial, administrative) may qualify as 'State' (e.g., under Prevention of Corruption Act if government-aided), unaided ones don't. Balbir Singh VS State of Punjab - 2012 Supreme(P&H) 840
Membership disputes in cooperatives are resolved via statutory forums, not writs routinely. Under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, disputes go to Cooperative Court under Sec. 91: any dispute regarding membership can only be remedied by filing a dispute under Sec. 91 of the Act before the Cooperative Court. Sudam Ganpat Kothambire VS State Of Maharashtra - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 184 (Note: Adapted to service context.)
A bare look at the provisions of section 91 of the M.C.S. Act, 1960 will clearly indicate that a person claiming to be a member of a society can certainly file dispute against the society under section 91. Prerana Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. VS Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Aurangabad - 2022 Supreme(Bom) 1623
For educational societies, expulsion or membership issues don't automatically enable writs for service matters. VIJAY PRATAP SINGH VS DIOS - 2012 Supreme(All) 1401
Writs aren't absolutely barred. Consider:- Society as 'State': Pervasive government control/aid. E.g., cooperative banks with State dominance. Unaided minority societies fail this. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565- Statutory Governance: If service rules are statutory (e.g., under specific education acts), public law violations allow writs. CBSE bye-laws aren't. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565Durga Sharan Chandra S/o Shri I. L. Chandra VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2023 0 Supreme(Chh) 711- Charge Memo Defects: Incompetent authority or proven mala fides (implead the authority personally). Still, participate in enquiry first. E. K. Srinivasan VS Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Minerals Ltd. - 2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 3519S. Matheswaran VS Principal Secretary & Commissioner for Revenue Administration, Chennai - 2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 382G. Dhanalakshmi VS District Collector, Dindigul - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 1246
Advise the employee/member to reply to the charge memo, participate in departmental enquiry, and challenge final disciplinary order (if any) via civil suit or internal remedies, as writ is premature and non-maintainable. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565
Navigating these disputes requires strategy. Stay informed, act promptly, and seek professional guidance. For more on employment law, subscribe to our blog!
References (Key Cases):1. Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi VS Sunil Kumar Sharma - 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 565 - St. Mary's Education Society (core on private societies).2. St. Mary’s Education Society VS Rajendra Prasad Bhargava - 2022 0 Supreme(SC) 848 - CBSE affiliation context.3. E. K. Srinivasan VS Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Minerals Ltd. - 2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 3519 - Bar on charge memo writs.4. G. Dhanalakshmi VS District Collector, Dindigul - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 1246 - Exceptional circumstances.
#WritPetition #LaborLawIndia #Article226
Challenging the charge memo dated 30.03.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to impugned charge memo dated 30.03.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.....
A charge memo dated 17.08.2009 was issued. ... The employee preferred a writ appeal. ... petition. ... He was suspended on 05.08.2009, followed by a charge memo dated 17.08.2009. ... , will not fall under the definition of an employee under Section 2(a) of p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0;padding
That apart, the 2nd respondent would fall within the contours of the Act in as much as even as per the communication issued by the petitioner, he has been referred to only as an Attender which falls within the definition of an Employee under the Act. ... They therefore sought to have the Writ Petition dismissed. 8. The 2nd respondent had filed a counter in which he would state that even in the enquiry notice issued to him, he was addressed only in hi....
The second respondent was suspended from service on 6/1/2015 and charge memo was issued on 13/7/2016. ... The first respondent herein, in his counter statement before the second and third respondents has specifically raised a plea that being a Secretary-in-charge, the appellant would not fall within the definition of an employee in stricto senso. 65. ... Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act where he can raise the issue of jurisdiction as well and su....
Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ... The charge memo ought to have been issued by the President and not by the Disciplinary sub committee. ... Rightly so, the Labour court set aside the charge sheet dated 7.9.2015 and subsequent disciplinary proceedings conducted on the basis of charge memo. ... The award of the labour court is not sustainable as it has set aside the memo of charges simply on the ground that the d....
Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ... The charge memo ought to have been issued by the President and not by the Disciplinary sub committee. ... Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO DATED 7.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE CHAIRMAN THE DISCIPLINARY SUB COMMITTEE. ... Accordingly, 2nd respondent was placed under suspension with effect from 5.6.2015 as per the order Ext.P1 issued by the President of the Society. A show....
Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ... The charge memo ought to have been issued by the President and not by the Disciplinary sub committee. ... Rightly so, the Labour court set aside the charge sheet dated 7.9.2015 and subsequent disciplinary proceedings conducted on the basis of charge memo. ... In fact, respondent No.2 does not fall within the definition of workman and the industrial dispute could not have....
The petitioners are challenging the communication dtd. 24/12/2020 as well as the order dtd. 11/5/2022 passed by the Hon'ble Minister under Sec. 154 of the Act, the only remedy available to the petitioners is to file the present Writ Petition. ... By the present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the impugned judgment and order dtd. 11/5/2022 passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Co-operation, Textile and Marketing Department of State#....
* The petitioners are challenging the communication dtd. 24/12/2020 as well as the order dtd. 11/5/2022 passed by the Hon'ble Minister under Sec. 154 of the Act, the only remedy available to the petitioners is to file the present Writ Petition. ... By the present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the impugned judgment and order dtd. 11/5/2022 passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Co-operation, Textile and Marketing Department of St....
petition has been filed challenging the charge memo issued by the third respondent dated 06.03.2019 and the subsequent order dated 29.05.2019 extending the period of suspension beyond retirement and the consequent show cause notice dated 03.12.2019. ... In the meantime, the petitioner was suspended from service by an order passed by the President of the third respondent-Society on 31.01.2019. The third respondent also issued a Charge Memo#H....
A bare look at the provisions of section 91 of the M.C.S. Act, 1960 will clearly indicate that a person claiming to be a member of a society can certainly file dispute against the society under section 91. In my opinion, the said judgment and observation in paragraph-12 clearly overlook the provisions of section 91 and hence do not constitute a binding precedent.
Therefore, framing of charges itself would not provide a cause of action for entertaining a writ petition. However, a writ petition against the charge memo may be entertained on certain exceptional circumstances, where the charge memo has been issued by an incompetent Authority having no jurisdiction or allegation of mala fides is raised. Even in case of raising an allegation of mala fides, the Authority against whom such an allegation raised must be impleaded as party respondent in his personal capacity. Except these circumstances, no writ needs to be entertained against t....
However, in proceedings dated 23.1.2017, a charge memo was issued to him setting out the charges. Instead of submitting explanation/objection, the writ petitioner has chosen to file the present writ petition, challenging the charge memo as well as the show cause notice issued in proceedings dated 6.1.2017. The proceedings dated 6.1.2017 is a memo issued to the writ petitioner, requesting him to submit his explanation in respect of the allegations set out in the memo. 3. On a perusal of the charge memo, this Court is of an opinion that there is no infirmity, as such, and the....
An employee of a body corporate, like a cooperative society, did not fall within the definition of Section 21 IPC. It seems that the attention of the court was not drawn towards the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act itself which quite specifically refer to the concept of public duty in Section 2 (b) and clearly defines different categories of public servants in Section 2 (c ). Definition of public servant in Section 2 (c ) (iii) is similar to the definition given in Section 21 clause twelfth of IPC. Cooperative Societies did not create a corporation but coopera....
The contesting respondent is neither a member of the Society nor can file the writ petition. The expulsion of the contesting respondent was approved by the order of the DDE dated 7.10.1994 and the WP 34971 of 1994 against the same was dismissed;
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
