CWP No. 4652 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 4652 of 2011 Date of decision : 15.03.2011 Pushpinder Pal ...Petitioner versus Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies, Ludhiana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. Balwinder Singh Sehra, Advocate for the petitioner. **** M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral) The matrix of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that one Amarjit Singh (Secretary of the Uski Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd. Uksi)- respondent No. 3 (for brevity “respondent-society”) retired on 30.06.2009 and the Society proposed to appoint a salesman in his place, after obtaining the approval from the Registrar, Cooperative Society. As per the resolutions dated 24.05.2010 (Annexures P2 & P3) and resolution dated 12.06.2010 (Annexure P4), the modalities of appointment and method of recruitment were stated to have been determined by the respondent- society. Consequently, the petitioner was selected as salesman by the Managing Committee, vide resolution dated 16.07.2010 (Annexure P5). 2. Meanwhile, a complaint (Annexure P6) against the members of the Managing committee was made to Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, Payal, District Ludhiana (respondent No. 2) on the ground that they have CWP No. 4652 of 2011 -2- appointed Pushpinder Pal s/o Amarjit Singh, in a wrongful manner and in complete violation of the Rules. It was alleged that neither any agenda was circulated to the complainant nor the applications have been invited from the eligible candidates in the village. As no nominee from the office of Registrar ever participated in the alleged meetings, therefore, the members of the Managing Committee and the Gram Panchayat requested to conduct an enquiry in this respect and for nullifying the illegal appointment of the petitioner. The resolutions (Annexures P2 to P4) and the entire recruitment procedure (Annexure P5) were claimed to be an eye-wash and illegal. 3. In the wake of complaint,the matter was got enquired and the Enquiry officer recorded that the resolution (Annexure P5), by means of which petitioner was appointed, was not signed by Bahadar Singh, SVP, Hardayal Singh and Rajinder Singh, Committee Members, although it was purported to have been unanimously passed. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 07.10.2010 (Annexure P7) to Assistant Registrar who recommended Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies, Ludhiana (respondent No. 1) to set aside the resolution dated 16.07.2010 (Annexure P5) passed by the Managing Committee, vide letter dated 20.12.2010. 4. Not only that, thereafter, the matter was got enquired into by respondent No. 1 and having perused the record of the Society, he set aside the resolution dated 16.07.2010 (Annexure P5), by means of impugned order dated 14.02.2011 (Annexure P8). 5. The petitioner did not feel satisfied and preferred the instant writ petition, challenging the impugned order (Annexure P8), invoking the provisions of Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record, with his valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, CWP No. 4652 of 2011 -3- to my mind, there is no merit in the present writ petition, in this context. 7. Ex, facie, the arguments of learned counsel that since no notice was issued to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned order (Annexure P8) is arbitrary and illegal, is neither tenable nor the observations of this Court in order dated 14.09.1994 in CWP No. 12972 of 1993 titled as Karam Chand vs. The Samana Cooperative Marketing-cum-processing Society Ltd., Samana Mandi, District Patiala and another (Annexure P9), are at all applicable to the facts of the present case, wherein, a regular employee of that Society was reinstated with arrears of salary, vide resolution dated 22.02.1989. This order was upset by the Deputy Registrar. In the wake of writ petition, this Court vide order dated 16.12.1992, directed the competent authority to take a fresh decision after giving notice to Managing committee of the Society. The order was passed by the Deputy Registrar exercising the powers of Registrar without giving any notice to the petitioner therein. On the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case, it was observed that the impugned order was in clear violation of the basic principles of natural justice namely audi altrem partem . 8. Possibly, no one can dispute with regard to the aforesaid observations but the same would not come to the rescue of the petitioner in the instant controversy. 9. As is evident from the record that the respondent-society created a false record/resolutions (Annexures P2 to P4), purported to have decided the modalities and the method of the recruitment, as an eye-wash to illegally select the petitioner, who was none else than the son of Sh. Amarjit Singh, Retd. Secretary of the Society. Petitioner was stated to have been selected as a salesman, vide unanimous resolution dated 16.07.2010 (Annexure P5). During the course of enquiry, it revealed that the resolution (Annexure P5) was not signed by Bahadar Singh, SVP, Hardayal Singh and Rajinder Singh, Committee Members, although it was CWP No. 4652 of 2011 -4- purported to have been unanimously passed. Having enquired the matter by Inspector, respondent No. 2 and ultimately by respondent No. 1, the resolution (Annexure P5) was set aside , by virtue of impugned order dated 14.02.2011 (Annexure P8), the operative part of which is as under:- “The Inspector Cooperative Societies got recorded his statement, stating that for this meeting the agenda dated 24.05.2010, which is at Page No. 16 which has been issued by the managing committee and the alleged agenda was also issued for the same, which is incorrect. The agenda would have been issued on the separate agenda register and the same would have been served to all the 9 committee members. But on this, there is signatures of only 6 committee members and 3 committee members of the managing committee were not served agenda through post also. Hence, Rule 80 has been violated, therefore, the resolution passed on 16.07.2010 is liable to be set aside. Keeping in view the above and the record produced by the society, statement of Circle Inspector and on the recommendations of the Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, Payal, I, Gurcharan Singh, Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Ludhiana, exercising the powers of Registrar Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh, is hereby set aside the resolution dated 16.07.2010 passed by the Uksi Cooperative Society Ltd in violation of Rule 80 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and Rules 1963”. 10. Meaning thereby, the resolution (Annexure P5) appointing the petitioner as a salesman, is based on totally false record created by the Society, in order to illegally adjust the petitioner, without following the due-procedure of recruitment. Thus, the appointment of the petitioner was not only illegal but void as well, which has to be avoided. Therefore, question of issuing any prior notice in such void action, was not legally required, in the obtaining circumstances of the case, as urged on behalf of the petitioner. 11. In this manner, as the alleged appointment of the petitioner, by way of resolution (Annexure P5) was illegal and arbitrary, which was correctly annulled by respondent no. 1, therefore, the contrary argument of learned counsel for the CWP No. 4652 of 2011 -5- petitioner 'strictu censu' deserve to be and are hereby repelled, in the present set of circumstances. 12. No other point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the counsel for the petitioner. 13. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed as such. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge March 15, 2011 G.Arora