GURCHARAN SINGH, EX-BUSINESS MANAGER, PUNJAB STATE FEDERATION OF CONSUMERS COOPERATIVE WHOLESALE STORES LIMITED Vs. PUNJAB STATE FEDERATION OF CONSUMERS COOPERATIVE WHOLESALE STORES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was a Business Manager employed with Punjab State Federation of Consumer's Cooperative Wholesale Stores Limited, Chandigarh (CONSTOFED) and was terminated from service on the ground that, for economic reason, the Administration was abolishing the post as Business Manager. He was, therefore, being paid one month's pay in lieu of notice by the order of the Managing Director, CONSTOFED. He preferred an appeal to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, described as the 2nd respondent, who dismissed the appeal on 12.03.1984. A revision filed to the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division, was also dismissed on 21.07.1988. All these orders passed by the respective authorities i.e. respondents 1 to 3, are in challenge before this Court as being violative of the respective rules.

(2.) The petitioner's contention is that CONSTOFED is a public undertaking with 95% of the shares being held by the State of Punjab and hence a functionality of State. The petitioner had joined with CONSTOFED on 25.08.1965 as an Assistant, later designated as a Field Officer from 01.04.1969 and still later, promoted as Business Manager from 30.10.1970. He was confirmed on that post on 14.12.1972 under the CONSTOFED Common Cadre Rules, 1971 that were made applicable to CONSTOFED w.e.f. 12.06.1972.

(3.) The petitioner was posted as a General Manager w.e.f. 31.03.1976 and the post of General Manager and Business Manager were equivalent posts, but when his junior B.S. Chahal, Field Officer, arrayed as the 4th respondent, was given the additional charge as Business Manager, the petitioner had been made the General Manager. The petitioner faced some departmental proceedings that entailed suspension but after an enquiry, he was reinstated on 21.11.1981 and posted as Business Manager, CONSTOFED, by the impugned order dated 12.07.1982. The services of both the petitioner and the 4th respondent, namely, B.S. Chahal, who was then working as a General Manager, Ludhiana, were dispensed with on the abolition of the post of the Business Manager on economic grounds.