V.THIRULOKACHANDER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, to quash the amendments which have been made to the by-laws of the third respondent Co-operative Society, as being inconsistent with the provisions of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and to set aside the registration granted by the second respondent to those amendments and for a further direction to reinstate the petitioner as Secretary and Chief Executive of the third respondent society. A brief prelude about the petitioner and certain earlier proceedings would be necessary before considering the subject in issue in this Writ Petition. The petitioner was appointed as a Senior Inspector of Co-operative Societies on 15.07.1993. During 1997, the petitioner was appointed by direct recruitment as Secretary of the third respondent society and functioned as such till 2003. During April 2003, a Criminal complaint was registered against the petitioner, which was taken on file as S.C. No. 193 of 2003, and the petitioner was convicted by the Principal Session Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order before this Court and the sentence was suspended. By order dated 19.01.2005, the petitioner was placed under suspension on the ground that he has been convicted of a criminal charge and the conviction has not been stayed by the High Court. On a challenge made by the petitioner to such order of suspension in W.P. No. 3657 of 2005, the same was stayed by order dated 28.04.2005. The Criminal Appeal No. 1546 of 2003, was allowed by judgment, dated 27.04.2010 and there was no further challenge to the said decision. Thus, the petitioner was acquitted of the criminal charge. The Writ Petition which was filed challenging the order of suspension was allowed by order dated 30.09.2011. Therefore, the petitioner's contention is that he should be reinstated as Secretary and Chief Executive of the third respondent society. However, the Board of the third respondent society by resolution, dated 21.10.2011, increased the cadre strength of Secretaries from one to four and the fifth respondent was promoted as one of the Secretaries by order dated 02.01.2012. The Management of the third respondent society filed a Writ Appeal in W.A. No. 2274 of 2011, against the order in W.P. No. 3657 of 2005, which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench by judgment dated 05.01.2012. Thereafter, the Management of the third respondent society sent a letter to the petitioner calling upon him to join duty on 29.03.2012 and on the petitioner joining duty, he was placed under suspension on the same day on different set of charges. Alleging that such order of suspension is willful disobedience of the order in W.P. No. 3657 of 2005, the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 782 of 2012. In the mean time, the Management had filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the judgment in W.A. No. 2274 of 2011 and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed by order dated 17.08.2012. It is thereafter, the petitioner joined duty on 28.08.2012 and he was posted as Secretary-II. In the light of the same, the Contempt Petition was closed by order dated 31.08.2012 and it is thereafter on 24.11.2012, the Board passed a resolution amending various provisions of the by-laws of the society.

(2.) The petitioner sent a lawyer's notice to the second respondent calling upon him not to approve the amendments to the by-laws and the petitioner also moved for re-opening the Contempt Petition No. 782 of 2012. Nevertheless the second respondent approved the amended by-laws, which is questioned in this Writ Petition. The Contempt Petition, which was reopened ended in a punishment being imposed on the President of the third respondent society, which was challenged before the Hon'ble Division Bench in Contempt Appeal No. 6 of 2013, which was allowed by judgment dated 16.08.2013, imposing a cost of Rs. 5,000/- on the petitioner. The petitioner was unsuccessful in a challenge made to the said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. In the background of these facts, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the amendments made to the by-laws of the third respondent society, the registration of those amendments as granted by the second respondent and for a direction that he should be only Secretary of the society and the Chief Executive.

(3.) The third respondent is a Multi State Cooperative Society governed under the provisions of the Act and the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder. The by-laws, which the petitioner seeks to question in this Writ Petition are the amended by-laws 2(h), 11, 14(a), 14(d), 16(i), 23, 25(1), 27(b), 33, 34, 36(d), 38(1) and insertion of 31(7) as being unconstitutional, ultra vires the Parent Act, arbitrary and null and void.