.s^ 'f^^^SS: SI!S"!U!*SBM» &33, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WntPetitionj@lN&3fil<!00 PETITTQNER : Sourabh Kumar Sharma, S/o Laxmi Chand Sharma, aged about 29 years, R/o Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon VE.RSUS RESFONDENTS : 1. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, CMiattisgarh, at & post Raipiu- ,Distric[ Raipuf(CG). 2. Deputy P_egistrar, Co-operafive Societies, S_ainandgaon 3, President, Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Lalbahadur Nagar, Dongargarii, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (CG). Registration No. 144. 4. Society Manager, Seva Sahakai-i Samiti Maryadit, Lalbahadtir Nagar, Dongargarh, Rajnaiidgaon District Rajnandgaon (CG). 5. Chief Executive Qfficer, Jila Sahakari Kendriya Baiik Maryadit, Rajnandgaon (CG). (WRTS- PETTTION UNDER .ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF TNDIA) (SB: Kon'ble Mr. Safeli K. Agiriliotri, J.) fteseHt : 81m A.K, Prasad, Advocateforthepetitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the Sfcate/roipondent No.l & 2. (Passed 01116B1 ofJiUtuary, 2008) 1. The petitioner iinpugna order dated 17.12.2.007 passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, ClAaftiggarh (Aimexisre P./2), wfaereunder, the petitioner has ehalleaged the tenrmiatioa order dated 13.12.2007, passed by the Seva Sahakai'i Samiti Maryadit, L-ilbahadur Nagar (Annexure P./l). Learaed counsel further submits that the respondent No. 3 and 4 are duly registered Co-operative society under prowsions of the ChJiattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 2. On pemsal offee impugiied order, it appears that, tiie Registrar bas not lookcd mto Section 55 aiid 64 of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (heremafter referred to as 'The Act, 1960). Sub gectioa (2) ofsection 55 ofThe Act, 1960 clearly provides thatwhere a dispute, mcluding a dispute regarding ten'ns of employment workmg conditions and disciplinary action taken by a gociety, arises betweea a society aiid its emp!oyees, the S.egistrar or any ofHcer appoiiited by hiin not below the raiik of Assistant P-egistrar shal! decide the dispute aad his deeision shall be binding oa the society and its employees. vr'f^''^/ ^'ii-'s;^^'^^" It clearSy shows that the dispute regardiiig temrination ofthe petitioner comes under working conditions and disciplinary action. R appears that the Registrar has passed a casual, cryptic order keeping in view that non applicant No. 2 is not a necessary pssty. It is expected that if a govenunent ofRcer perfbnns judici^l fimction, he should exaiTiine the faets of the case 011 inerit having regard to ai! the fL requirements o^judicial tribunal. Iii view ofthe foregomg, this petition is allowed. The inatter is retmtted back to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, ClAattisgarii, to decide the matter, in accordance with law, as eariy as possible, preferably within a period oftfTree weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy ofthe order. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Ssfau N§N^s;^?3g