DHANANSUM CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED, DHANANSU DIST LUDHIANA Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing orders dated 28.8. 1999, Annexure PI and 12.11.1999, Annexure P2.

(2.) It has been averred by the petitioner that respondent No. 3 Darshan Singh was working as a peon-cum-chowkidar in the petitioner-Society. Many complaints were received against him. Petitioner-Dha-nansu Co-operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Dhanansu (hereinafter called the Society) conducted an enquiry and found Darshan Singh, respondent No. 3 guilty of remaining absent from duty and also of coming of the society in a drunken condition;/ This enquiry was conducted by who served charge-sheet on Darshan Singhy respondent No, 3. He failed to appear before the Enquiry Committee and the" Enquiry Committee vide its report dated 12.9.1997 held that he was guilty of all the charges including absence from duty and also coming to the Society in a drunken condition. Earlier to this, a show cause notice was given to him. Reply dated 5.9.1997 was filed by him to the show cause notice. The Enquiry Committee heard him on 5.9.1997 and the next date of hearing was fixed for 12.9.1997. He again did not appear before the Enquiry Committee and thereafter the Enquiry Committee proceeded against him.

(3.) Another show cause notice was served on Darshan Singh, respondent No. 3 on 20.9. 1997 whereimhe was called upon by the Society to appear before the Managing Committee on 23.9.1997. He did not ap\-pear before the Managing Committee and the Managing Comrnittee, thus, presumed that he had nothing to say. By accepting the report of the Enquiry Committee, an order of the termination by way of the resolution of the Committee was passed against him. He filed an appeal against this resolution before the Deputy Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Ludhiana. The Deputy Registrar, vide order dated 28.8.1998, copy Annexure PI, held the order of termination of services of respondents No. 3 as illegal and quashed the same. A revision petition was filed against this order but the revision petition was also dismissed vide order dated 12.11.1999, copy Annexure P2.