KRISHNA CHANDRA GUPTA Vs. REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who was employed in the Dubey Co-operative Commercial Bank Limited, as Assistant Manager-cum-Accountant, prays for the issue of a writ of 'certiorari' for quashing an order of the respondent No. 3, the Board of Directors of the said Bank, dismissing him from service.

(2.) THE applicant was appointed to the post of Assistant Manager-cum-Accountant on 16th June 1959 by an order passed by the Chairman of the Board of Directors. He was appointed on a fixed salary of Rs. 200/- p. m. and placed on probation for a period of twelve months. Some months after his appointment, when certain mistakes and irregularities committed by the petitioner were brought to the notice of the Board of Directors, the petitioner was cautioned to be careful in the maintenance of accounts. In March 1960, Bhagwat Prasad, a peon of the Bank, made a complaint to the chairman that the petitioner had abused him and slapped him on 10th March 1960. In the same month, a complaint was made by Messrs. N. 6. Brothers, Bilaspur, against the petitioner with regard to the settlement of a loan of Rs. 500/ -. The Working Committee of the Bank, therefore, passed a resolution on 17th March 1960 suspending the applicant. On 18th March 1960 a letter was addressed to the petitioner communicating this resolution of the Working committee, and asking the applicant to express his regret for his misbehaviour towards Bhagwat Prasad. In that letter a reference was also made to the complaint made by Messrs. N. G. Brothers and the applicant was asked to give his explanation with regard to all matters within ten days. The applicant did not give any reply. He, however, addressed a letter to the Chairman of the Board of directors on 2nd April 1960 tendering his apology for having slapped Bhagwat prasad. He also expressed his regret for the acts of his complained against by messrs. N. G. Brothers. On 28th March 1960 the Working Committee passed a resolution dismissing the petitioner with effect from 18th March 1960, that is, from the date he was suspended.

(3.) SHRI Pande, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, argued that the order passed by the Working Committee dismissing the petitioner from service was invalid for the reasons: that the Working Committee had no power to dismiss or suspend him and the order of dismissal could not in any case be given retrospective effect as from the date of suspension, and that it was made by the working Committee without giving to the applicant a reasonable opportunity of meeting the charges on which the Working Committee based its decision to dismiss the applicant from service. It was said that the petitioner was not given any notice to show cause against the punishment of dismissal; that no statement of allegations or charges was furnished to him and no enquiry of any kind, was held by the Working Committee; and that the order of dismissal was passed violating all rules of natural justice.