JAGDEEP MEHTA Vs. REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Petitioner was appointed as the General Manager by the respondent-society vide appointment letter dated 27.8.2001 on a consolidated salary of Rs.22,000/- per month. As per appointment letter the probation period was fixed as six months. One of the terms of the appointment was that after confirmation services of the petitioner were terminable by one month's notice by either side. However vide letter dated 4th April, 2002 petitioner was suspended as per decision of the Managing Committee vide Resolution dated 3rd April, 2002 for financial irregularities. The petitioner was also served with a memo containing the Article of charges. Ms. Nargis Raj Kumar a Member of the Managing Committee who was one of the signatories to the Resolution placing him under suspension was appointed as Inquiry Officer. Petitioner was granted seven days time to file reply. When he applied for certain documents to controvert the charges levelled against him followed by reminders the Managing Committee on 24th April, 2002 took a decision to re-organise the management structure of the Society whereby the poet of General Manager was abolished and posts for four Managers and three Assistant Managers were created. In the meeting held on 29th April, 2002 the recommendations for re-organisation of the management structure were approved. On account of the abolition of the post of General Manager, the services of the petitioner were terminated with effect from 29th April, 2002, intimation whereof was given to the petitioner vide letter dated 4th May, 2002. In lieu of one month's notice one month's salary was paid to the petitioner.

(2.) . According to the petitioner action of Managing Committee in terminating the services is malafide and arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and is also a result of personal vendetta of its President Shri Krishan Lal Sehgal as the petitioner had improved the management of the Club and had organised number of competitive and cultural programmes and due to all-round appreciation of his work by the Members of the Club, the President started feeling uneasy and also started finding fault with the working of the petitioner end started insulting him in front of his junior colleagues and staff of the Club. He further alleges that in the month of November, 2001 the President Shri Krishan Sehgal wanted to get some bills cleared pertaining to M/s Kalpana, a Contractor who had done work of renovation in the Club amounting to balance amount of Rs.81,504/- and when the petitioner objected to clear this amount on the ground that the contractor had not come to do physical verification, the President instructed the Engineer to make the payment to M/s Kalpana without clearance of the Bills by the petitioner. When new elections for the post of vice President were held on 31st March, 2002 and Col. Suresh Chand was elected as Vice-president of the society, on the very next day a meeting of the Managing Committee was held wherein the approval to place the petitioner under suspension and also to issue charge sheet was approved.

(3.) . The petitioner has challenged the impugned action on multifarious grounds. Firstly, that as per bye-law 21 of the Society the General Body is the only competent authority to create post, to fix the programme of activities after obtaining their report from the committee and not the Managing Committee and therefore the abolition of post of General Manager vide resolution dated 29th April, 2002 was illegal and without jurisdiction. Secondly the appointment of Nargis Raj Kumar as an Inquiry Officer was illegal as she herself was one of the signatories to the resolution passed in the meeting held on 3rd Aprl, 2002 placing the petitioner under suspension. Thirdly, the action of the respondent-Society is against the principles of natural justice as his services could not have been terminated in the midst of inquiry and the resolution for abolition of the post of General Manager was a device to get rid of the petitioner without waiting for the result of the inquiry. Fourthly the resolution for the appointment of four Managers and three Assistant-Managers on the excuse of reorganisation of the management structure is against the provisions of Rule 49 of DCS Rules, 1973 Which reads as under:- 49. Minimum Staff to be Employed