VALLABH CHAND MEHTA Vs. RAJASTHAN CO-OPERATIVE DIARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition raises a question as to whether the petitioner has been absorbed in the service of the non -petitioner No. 1 or he continues to be in the service of non -petitioner No. 2. In pursuance of the advertisement, the petitioner was appointed as Accounts trainee by the non -petitioner No. 2 namely : Paschimi Rajasthan Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Sangh') vide order dated November 5, 1976 (Anx. 1). The petitioner was appointed as Accounts trainee along with three other persons and his position was at No. 2. It was mentioned in the order that on satisfactory completion of the training, the candidates may be considered for regular appointment, if vacancies available in the cadre of the Junior Accountants. It appears that the diary plant and chilling centres of the Sangh along with their staff were taken over and transferred to the non -petitioner No. 1 namely : Rajasthan Co -operative Dairy Federation Limited (for short 'the Federation'). The Sangh issued a notice (Anx. 5) dated April 12, 1980 to the employee of the Sangh including the petitioner. This notice makes mention of amalgamation of the Sangh with the Federation but admittedly, it is incorrect. By this notice, the employees were asked to give their option of their service within a month. It was stated that it has been decided by the Sangh that all posts existing in the Sangh be abolished and service of all the employees has been transferred on deputation with effect from the date on which the Sangh is amalgamated with the Federation arid at the same time, the Federation is willing and prepared to absorb all such employees of the Sangh, who opt for the Federation Services on the terms and conditions of service as are prevalent in the Federation and that may be revised or modified in future. It was also stated in the notice that that the option submitted by the employees shall be final and no employee shall be allowed to change his option. It was also provided that employees, who will opt for the Federation, shall be demeed to have joined the Federation on the day, they, submit their option. In pursuance of this notice, the petitioner gave his option on May 24, 1980 wherein, he clearly and categorically mentioned that this option is subject to the regular appointment as a Junior Accountant. The petitioner, thereafter, came to know that the Sangh has appointed Shri D.S. Chouhah and Shri P.M. Dugar as Junior Accountants vide office order dated Augitst 18, 1980 (Anx. 2). In the origninal order of the appointment as Accountant trainees Shri P.M. Dugar was at S. No. 3, while the petitioner was at S. No. 2. On August 25, 1980 the petitioner madea representation (Anx, 3) to the Sangh for his appointment as Junior Accountant. It was further; averred that the petitioner was never absorbed in the service of the Pederation and the Federation made it clear by its letters dated September 16, 1980, (Anx. 7) and September 27, 1980 (Anx. 9). The Sangh, on the other hand, took the stand that the service of the petitioner stands transferred to the Federation so it is only the Federation, which is competent to give him appointment as Junior Accountant, as is evident from the Sangh's letter dated September 12, 1980 (Anx. 4). The petitioner's stand is that the petitioner having not been absorbed by the Federation, so he continues in the service of the Sangh and he is entitled to be appointed as Junior Accountant after the appointment of Shri D.S. Chouhan. Although, the petitioner stated that Shr P.M. Dugar will not be affected as there are five posts of Junior Accountants in the Sangh and as against five posts only two are working; vide office note dated November 20, 1977 (Anx. 10). The petitioner, therefore, prayed for his appointment to the post of Junior Accountant in the Sangh. It may also be stated that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Federation directed the petitioner to report himself to the Sangh by office order dated August 1, 1981 (Anx. 10A). It was also stated in the order that the petitioner gave the conditional option to continue in the service of the Federation. He appeared before the Selection Committee for the post of Junior Accountant, but he was rejected on August 20, 1980.

(2.) THE Federation in its reply, took a clear stand that the petitioner was not absorbed in the service of the Federation and his option was conditional. The petitioner was not selected for the post of Junior Accountant, so he was sent back to the Sangh.

(3.) THE petitioner submitted a rejoinder to the reply filed by the non -petitioner No. 1 and further, submitted an additional rejoinder to the reply of the non -petitioners. I shall refer to the pleas taken by the parties in respect of the preliminary objections, while dealing with the same.