1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7518/2006 (Anil Kumar Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) Date of order : 22.8.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. M.S. Purohit, for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Choudhary, Dy. Govt. Counsel. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this case, the petitioner is challenging the validity of the order impugned dated 27.11.2006 passed by Registrar, Coo-operative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur so also the compliance order dated 18.12.2006 passed by General Manager, Jaisalmer Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar Limited, Jaisalmer by which in pursuance of Annexure-6 dated 27.11.2006, it is ordered by Registrar that no appointment shall be made on contract basis directly and appointments of salesman and Pharmacist in the Bhandar shall be made on contract basis from N.G.Os, Societies and Seva Samitis and no direct recruitment shall be made on contract basis. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that such an order passed by Registrar is totally arbitrary, illegal and against the constitutional provisions because no restriction can be imposed by Registrar to appoint salesman and pharmacist only through N.G.Os, Societies and Seva Samities. As per learned counsel for petitioner, straight-away the services of petitioner was terminated without even providing opportunity of hearing and notice to him. Further it is submitted that order dated 22.11.2006is totally without jurisdiction because Registrar by way of issuing administrative instructions cannot impose any service conditions in casual manner, therefore, the order passed by Registrar for terminating the services of the petitioner is arbitrary, illegal and against the constitutional provisions. Learned Dy. Govt. Counsel submits that there is a power left with the Registrar under Rule 39 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Rules, 2003 in which the Registrar is empowered to frame service conditions for supervise and control all the employee of the Societies, therefore, the order passed by Registrar dated 27.11.2006 is in consonance with Rule 39 of the Rules of 2003. Therefore, no interference is required in this writ petition. I have perused the order impugned. In my opinion, the order Annexure-6 dated 27.11.2006 cannot 3 be termed as rule framed under Rule 39 of the Rules of 2003. It is only a communication sent by the Registrar to all the Wholesale Bhandars of the State while observing that appointments shall not be made on contract basis directly and appointments shall be made through N.G.Os, Societies and Seva Samities. Such an order cannot be termed as provisions or rule framed under Rule 39 of the Rules of 2003. Further the order of termination of the services of the petitioner is also against the principles of natural justice because just after receiving such communication by the Registrar, the General Manager, Jaisalmer Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar Limited, Jaisalmer has dispensed with the services of the petitioner without giving him any notice. Therefore, such an order is against the principles of natural justice because it has been passed without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In this view of the matter, the order dated 27.11.2006 (Annexure-6) passed by Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur as well as the order dated 18.12.2006 (Annexure-7) passed by General Manager, Jaisalmer Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar Limited, Jaisalmer are hereby quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun