AJMER CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AJMER Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY UNDER THE RAJASTHAN SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT AJMER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) dated September 21, 1987 in Civil Writ Petition No.2333 of 1987 is a coiled cause, swollen in mass, requiring enough of load-shedding so as to get to the core of the controversy.

(2.) The appellant bank is an apex body. It is a Central Co-operative Society registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 operating in the District of Ajmer. There are village level co-operative societies (in short called the "Samitis") and those too are registered under the aforesaid Act. The village level Samitis are members of the appellant bank. They obtain loans from the appellant bank and lend them over to their agriculturist members. The Samitis are headed by Managers who are appointed under the relevant rules framed under the aforesaid Act. Those rules provide the method in which disciplinary action can be taken against the employees of the Samitis, including the Managers.

(3.) The second respondent, Bhagwan Singh was the Manager of one such Samiti in village Kayad. It appears that there was complaint against him of misuse and embezzlement of funds of the Samiti. Initially, in some instances, he was asked to make good the money of the supposed mis-use or embezzlement. Some payments apparently were agreed to be made by the second respondent. Still there were others in which there arose disputes. The second respondent in the meantime was suspended and charge sheets were served on him. An Enquiry Officer was appointed and an enquiry held. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report. Some of the charges were reported proved against the second respondent. A second notice was given to him to show cause why he be not dismissed from service. On July 1, 1983, order for dismissal of service was passed against the second respondent. According to the appellant it was dispatched to the second respondent the same day vide Registered A.D. but according to the second respondent no such dispatch was made as he was never served with the dismissal order. On July 4, 1983, the second respondent filed a Civil Suit No.422 of 1983 for injunction in the Court of the Munsiff, Ajmer City (East), Ajmer, impleading the appellant as the sole respondent. His main attack in the suit was against the initiation of the enquiry, the manner in which it was conducted and the procedural illegalities with when it was rife. The following relief was claimed in the suit.