LAWS(ALL)-1997-7-12

VIDYA VARIDHI PANDEY Vs. SAHAYAK VIKAS ADHIKARI

Decided On July 10, 1997
VIDYA VARLDHI PANDEY Appellant
V/S
SAHAYAK VIKAS ADHIKARI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, who was an Accountant in Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Dugraee, district Fatehpur, moved an application before the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Fatehpur for his appointment as Secretary, Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Dharupur, district Fatehpur (here in after referred to as Dharupur Society). PETITIONER's prayer was recommended by the Assistant Development Officer and the Branch Manager of the District Cooperative Bank. The District Assistant Registrar vide his order dated 6.2.1990 appointed the petitioner to work as the Secretary of Dharupur Society till further arrangement is made. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner handed over charge of the post of Accountant in Dugraee Society and joined Dharupur Society to officiate as its Secretary. By order dated 24.7.1993, the respondent No. 3, who was a Cadre Secretary working in another society, was transferred to Dharupur Society as Its Secretary. As the petitioner did not handover the charge of the post of Secretary of Dharupur Society to respondent No. 3, Sahayak Vikas Adhikari (Co-operative), Fatehpur asked the petitioner, vide order dated 10.3.1994 at Annexure X to the writ petition, to handover charge to respondent No. 3. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(2.) PARTIES have exchanged affidavits and we have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made the following submissions in support of the writ petition : 1. As the initial appointment of the petitioner as Secretary of Dharupur; Society was confirmed by the Society on 20.1.1992, he became a confirmed cadre Secretary belonging to the centralised service and therefore, he cannot be replaced by any other Secretary unless he is also transferred to another society as Secretary. 2 As the transfer of respondent No. 3 to Dharupur Society was stayed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies vide order dated 29.9.1993, the transfer order cannot be implemented and the petitioner cannot be relieved from the post of Secretary of Dharupur Society and respondent No. 3 cannot work as Secretary of that Society, 3.As the petitioner is working as Secretary for several years, his service is liable to be regularised, and 4 In any case the petitioner is entitled to be reverted to his original post of Accountant in Dugraee society. Learned counsel for the respondents has disputed the aforesaid contentions.

(3.) THE second submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner has to be rejected for three reasons, namely: (i) Rule 13 (1) (ii) has conferred power to transfer a Secretary on the District Administrative Committee. To the same effect is Regulation 36, according to which District Administrative Committee can transfer a Secretary as per Rule 13 and the guidelines laid down by the State Authority. THE rules and regulations do not give power to the Deputy Registrar to transfer the Secretary or to stay his transfer. No such provision has been placed before the Court by the learned counsel for the parties, (ii) THE respondent No. 3 was transferred to Dharupur Society by the District Administrative Committee on 24.7.1993. THE Deputy Registrar vide his order dated 29.9.1993 has directed that if any transfer order has not been implemented till then, the same may be stayed. THE respondent No. 3 reported to Dharupur Society pursuant to the order of his transfer much before the aforementioned order was passed by the Deputy Registrar, but he was not permitted to work by the Chairman in collusion with the petitioner. THE order of the Deputy Registrar cannot apply to such a case, and (iii) THE petitioner was appointed to work as Secretary till further arrangement Is made. Petitioner's authorisation to work as Secretary was conditional, the condition being till further arrangement is made. Further arrangement having been made by transfer of respondent No. 3, the petitioner has ceased to have any right to continue as Secretary of Dharupur Society. He has, therefore, no locus standi to challenge the transfer of respondent No. 3.