GURDIAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is not disputed that the Managing Director was appointed under the Common Cadre Rules with the approval of the Registrar on 18th May, 1987. The Chairman was appointed on 29th March, 1988. The respondents claim that they have got a right to appointe a Managing Director or a Chairman under Section 26(2)(a) of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 . The right has been given to the State either to appoint the Managing Director or the Chairman. If the Managing Director is appointed then Chairman is to be elected. There is no dispute that the Manging Director is already working having been appointed in accordance with the Act, Rules and Bye-laws. There cannot be two Managing Directors. The nomination of the Chairman Prima facie appears to be contrary to the rules. The facts, circumstances and the law involved in this case is squarely covered by the order of G.C. Mital, J. in Civil Writ Petition No. 3370 of 1980 (Gurbanchan Singh Bajwa etc. v. The State of Punjab etc.) dated May 17, 1988.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents contends that the Managing Director can be appointed under Section 26(2)(a) of the Act by the State or under Bye-laws 21 which envisages three conditions, i.e. that the Managing Director can be appointed by the State as envisaged under Section 26 and if the State does not appoint, by the Sugard under the common Cadre Rules and if the Managing Director is not appointed by any of the above two authorities, then Board of Directors are at liberty to appoint him. It is contended that the Managing Director has not been appointed by the State or by the Sugared and, therefore, the appointment by the Board of Directors is bad and cannot be taken notice of. This question does not arise because the appointment of the Managing Director has not been challenged nor he had been removed in accordance with law. It is further contended that if the appointment of the Managing Director by the Board of Directors has to be considered as invalid then the Chairman could never be elected under the bye-laws.

(3.) Be that as it may, in view of the facts and circumstances stated above, there cannot be two Managing Directors and if the Managing Director not having been appointed in accordance with law or has not been removed, the Chairman cannot be permitted to act during the pendency of the writ petition. In view of these facts and circumstances, respondent No. 4 if restrained from acting as Chairman during the pendency of the writ petition.