SHREE KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved against the order of termination passed against the petitioner contained in Annexure-7 the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this writ petition is that in view of the settled legal position, as enumerated in the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1941 of 1985. Jaikishan and Ors., v. U.P. Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Ors., decided on 3.3.1989 Co-operative Society is an industry and persons engaged in the Societies are workmen and come within the definition of the workmen as contained in U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, hence the termination of the services of a workman engaged in a Co-operative Society without complying with the provisions of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act would be non-est.

(3.) There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner was engaged as salesman in the Society, which according to the petitioner, is an instrumentality of the State, as more than 90 per cent of the assets and the liabilities of the said Society vest in the State Government and it functions mainly on the financial assistance granted by the State Government under the supervision of the Registrar, U.P. Co-operative Societies, and Uttar Pradesh Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Sewa Niyamawali, 1976 are applicable to the persons in the said Society and the petitioner was drawing a salary of Rs. 300/- per month.