RAM CHARAN PRAJAPATI Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging order dated 09/11/10 passed by MP Co-operative Tribunal, Bhopal in F.A. No.85/09. By said order learned MP State Co-operative Tribunal has reversed the order passed by Joint Registrar Co- operative Societies.

(2.) Petitioner was temporarily appointed as Chowkidar at Collectorate. It was submitted by the petitioner that he was given increments in year 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2004. Provident Fund was also deducted from salary of petitioner. His appointment was made on the post of Chowkidar after approval from Registrar Co-operative Societies. He was regularly paid salary till June 2006. After that he was not paid salary and when he enquired the matter he was informed that his services have been terminated. On being aggrieved by termination of services petitioner has filed a dispute before Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies for his reinstatement in service. Joint Registrar held that Board of Director and Staff Sub- Committee was dissolved and Sub-Registrar of the Society Rewa was appointed as Administrator. Before passing order dated 7/12/2004 Sub-registrar Co-operative Society ought to have taken approval of the Registrar Co-operative Societies. In absence of approval/sanction of Registrar Co-operative Society the order terminating the services of petitioner was bad in law and same was without jurisdiction. Joint Registrar Co-operative Society is further held that dispute was filed after receipt of information on 16/07/09. The order has been passed on 7/12/04. Respondents have not produced the order dated 7/12/04 before the Joint Registrar to show that order has been passed on the said date, neither they have filed any acknowledgement showing service of the order on petitioner therefore, it will be presumed that dispute is said to be filed within the limitation prescribed under the Co-operative Societies Act . In view of above, it was submitted by the petitioner that he was permanent employee and his termination made orally was bad in law.

(3.) Respondents had filed a reply and stated therein that petitioner was appointed temporarily on the post of Chowkidar. Petitioner was appointed on the post of process server and due to mistake, post has been mentioned as Chowkidar. The order of appointment of petitioner was cancelled on 7/12/04. It was also admitted that provident fund was deducted from the salary of petitioner.