Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Niranjan Kumar vs Bihar State Milk Cooperative ... on 23 April, 2018

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 PAT 888

Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi

Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Nilu Agrawal

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        Letters Patent Appeal No.1632 of 2017
                                            In
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5204 of 2017
     ======================================================
     Niranjan Kumar, son of Late Baleshwar Prasad Singh, resident of B- 42, Sri
     Ramkunj Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, P.O.- Boring Road, P.S.-
     Buddha Colony, District- Patna- 800001.
                                                                      ... ... Appellant
                                         Versus
1.   Bihar State Milk Cooperative Federation Ltd. Through Its Managing Director,
     Dairy Development Complex, P.O.- Bihar Veterinary College, Patna- 800014.
2.   The Managing Director, Bihar State Milk Cooperative Federation Ltd., Dairy
     Development Complex, P.O.- Bihar Veterinary College, Patna- 800014.
3.   The State of Bihar, through Principal Secretary, Co-operative Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.   The Principal Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar,
     Patna.
5.   Nirmal Kumar Singh, son of Sri Rama Nand Singh, resident of Village-
     Sikrahata Kala, P.O.- Sikrahata, District- Bhojpur, presently Member of Board
     of Director, Sahabad, Dughdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Katira, Ara,
     District- Bhojpur.
6.   Sahabad Dughdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Ara (Bhojpur) Katira, Ara,
     District- Bhojpur through its Chairman.
                                                                  ... ... Respondents
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Appellant       :      Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, Senior Advocate
                                    Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate
     For the Respondent State:      Mr. Raj Ballabh Pd.Yadav, AAG-11
     For the Respondents :          Mr. P.K.Shahi, Senior Advocate
                                    Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate
                                    Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
             and
             HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL
     ORAL JUDGMENT
     (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI)

      Date : 23-04-2018


                 Heard counsel for the parties.

                 2. The origin of the present appeal lies in an earlier writ

     application preferred by the Bihar State Milk Co-operative

     Federation Ltd. as well as by the Managing Director of Bihar State
 Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018
                                            2/9




       Milk Co-operative Federation Ltd., Patna (hereinafter referred to

       as 'the Federation'). Their hands were forced because of an order

       dated 31.03.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Government of

       Bihar, Patna in Supersession Appeal No. 7 of 2016.

                    3. The Managing Director of the Milk Co-operative

       Federation in exercise of power under Section 41(1) and Section

       41(3) of Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935, dissolved the

       Managing Committee of Shahabad Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd.

       (hereinafter referred to as 'the Sangh')        and appointed Shri

       Ramesh Kumar Mishra, General Manager, COMFED as

       Administrator. It was also directed that all decisions taken in

       respect of one, Niranjan Kumar, the then so called Managing

       Director of the Sangh to be declared illegal.

                    4. The order of supersession was assailed by one, Nirmal

       Kumar Singh, who was said to be a Member of Shahabad Dugdh

       Utpadak Sangh.            The core issue before the Minister, while

       exercising power of appeal, was whether the supersession order

       passed against the Shahabad Society was legal or valid.

                    5. In a detailed order dated 31.03.2017, passed by the

       Minister, which was Annexure-1 to the writ application, while

       deciding the issue of supersession, which he held to be bad, he

       went overboard and decided the appointment/absorption as well as
 Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018
                                            3/9




       continuance of Niranjan Kumar as Managing Director of Shahabad

       Society to be valid. The reason for doing so given by the Minister

       is that manner of functioning of Niranjan Kumar was also one of

       the reasons provided in the order of supersession.

                    6. The Milk Co-operative Federation and the Managing

       Director being aggrieved by the findings and declarations given by

       the Minister in the impugned order, moved the Patna High Court

       in a writ application which was registered as CWJC No. 5204 of

       2017. The petitioners, i.e. the Federation, who are Respondent 1

       and 2 to the present Letters Patent Appeal, urged and argued

       before the learned single Judge that they are not seriously

       contesting the decision given by the Minister with regard to

       supersession, but the findings, which has been given by the

       Minister with regard to the status of Mr. Niranjan Kumar, was

       totally uncalled for. It is their case that Niranjan Kumar was an

       employee of Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh.

       He was sent on deputation to the Shahabad Dugdh Utpadak Sangh

       and his lien with the original employer was not terminated. No

       doubt, some effort was made by Mr. Niranjan Kumar as well as the

       Shahabad Society to absorb and retain the service of Mr. Niranjan

       Kumar permanently, for which certain deliberations and exercise

       had been done but with the kind of controversies and his conduct,
 Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018
                                            4/9




       the Federation decided to withdraw the services of Niranjan

       Kumar and give him another responsibility or post and position.

       However, the Minister by exceeding his power under Section

       41(6) of the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 entered into an

       area of adjudication by exercising powers not vested in him. The

       decision of the Minister, which if read in entirety, gives an

       impression to this Court that it was not the issue of supersession,

       which was of paramount importance, but the continuance of Mr.

       Niranjan Kumar and his absorption on the post of Managing

       Director, which was the core issue which needed to be adjudicated

       upon.

                    7. With the above declaration made by the Minister with

       regard to the status of Niranjan Kumar and his continuance being

       given a seal of approval despite the decision of the parent

       department to recall him and give him posting, rightly gave a

       cause for the Federation to assail the order before the writ Court.

                    8. When the matter was earlier heard in detail by the

       learned single Judge, an order dated 07.04.2017 was passed. The

       learned single Judge in the hotly contested matter did take note of

       the fact that the issue before the Hon'ble Minister was the position

       of supersession and it was totally uncalled for and unwarranted for

       the Minister to decide the issue of absorption and continuance of
 Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018
                                            5/9




       Niranjan Kumar on the post of Managing Director in the Shahabad

       Milk Co-operative Society.              Therefore, he passed an order of

       restraint so far as that part of the order of the Minister was

       concerned. The learned single Judge taking note of the fact that

       the order of restraint will have a fall out on the interest of Niranjan

       Kumar, who was not a party to the writ application initially, was

       impleaded as respondent No. 5.

                    9. The learned single Judge after hearing the parties

       decided to finally dispose off the writ application by a detailed

       order dated 18.08.2017, wherein he held the order of the Hon'ble

       Minister declaring the status of Mr. Niranjan Kumar to be

       unwarranted and uncalled for. He set aside the order of the

       Minister dated 31.03.2017. Since the question of illegality of the

       supersession was given up by the writ petitioner, therefore, that

       aspect was not adjudicated and the order of the Minister to that

       extent remained operative.

                    10. An appeal, namely, L.P.A. No. 1632 of 2017 came to

       be preferred by Mr. Niranjan Kumar. Much arguments came to be

       made on behalf of the learned senior counsel representing Mr.

       Niranjan Kumar as to how the order of the learned single Judge is

       required to be interfered with and how serious prejudice has been

       caused to him by the observations made by the learned single
 Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018
                                            6/9




       Judge. He harped on the fact that when the earlier order dated

       07.04.2017

was passed by the learned single Judge he was not made a party and despite the same, an ex-parte order of stay was granted against the finding in his favour by the Minister, therefore, any subsequent decision and adjudication made vide order dated 18.08.2017 will not cure the illegality committed initially.

11. This Court finds it strange as to why so much is sought to be made out about the order of the learned single Judge where he very fairly refrained from commenting upon the issue relating to the status of Mr. Niranjan Kumar either with regard to his absorption as a Managing Director in the Shahabad Milk Co- operative Society or the order of recall of his service passed by the Managing Director and his new posting and assignment provided to him. This was done with a purpose and object because the learned single Judge was conscious of the fact that the issue before the Hon'ble Minister was issue of supersession of the society and it was not a service appeal of Mr. Niranjan Kumar, who was not even a party in the Supersession Appeal No. 7 of 2016. Obviously, the Minister, therefore, had transgressed his boundaries by going into merits of adjudication, which was neither necessary nor fell within his jurisdiction, of exercise of power.

12. The decision, which had been taken by the Managing Director of the Federation with regard to the status of Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018 7/9 Niranjan Kumar, was an independent cause of action and Mr. Niranjan Kumar had all the freedom and right to knock at the doors of the forum available to him. But the whole effort on the part of Niranjan Kumar is to somehow hang on to the decision and observation of the Hon'ble Minister and by a via-media by preferring the present appeal, i.e. L.P.A. No. 1632 of 2017, to focus on the issue of his absorption, continuance as well as repatriation, which was not the issue for adjudication either before the Minister or before the learned single Judge.

13. The learned single Judge, therefore, has rightly allowed Mr. Niranjan Kumar to assail all the decisions which may have been taken by the Federation contrary to his interest and by refusing to comment upon the legality or otherwise. He has rightly held back his horses for the reason that he did not want to create any prejudice either in favour of Mr. Niranjan Kumar or against the interest of the decision taken by the Managing Director of the Federation.

14. Effort on part of the learned senior advocate representing Mr. Niranjan Kumar is to convert the forum of appeal into one where his issue should be decided when it was not his case even before the learned single Judge that he was willing to Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018 8/9 contest the issue relating to his absorption, continuance or repatriation, which was an independent cause.

15. In the totality, therefore, we do come to a conclusion that the Hon'ble Minister had exceeded his jurisdiction by passing a decisive order in favour of continuance of Mr. Niranjan Kumar as a Managing Director of the Shahabad Milk Co-operative Society as well as holding his repatriation to be bad and such a decision, which exceeded the jurisdiction and power of the Minister, was rightly interfered with by the learned single Judge . We also opine that the learned single Judge vide order dated 18.08.2017 has allowed Mr. Niranjan Kumar all the freedom to assail the decisions taken by the Managing Director of the Co- operative Federation before the forum he chooses and he has also rightly observed that none of the observations made by any of the authorities, be it the Minister or be it the writ Court, will in any manner cause prejudice either in favour or against Mr. Niranjan Kumar.

16. We are of the opinion that the decision in relation to the status that Mr. Niranjan Kumar is an independent cause of action and the adjudication made in the writ application of the Bihar State Milk Co-operative Federation as well as the Managing Director of the said Federation can not be used to decide the status Patna High Court LPA No.1632 of 2017 dt.23-04-2018 9/9 or otherwise of Mr. Niranjan Kumar on the basis of observation of the Hon'ble Minister.

17. The appeal, therefore, is required to be dismissed as we do not find any infirmity in order dated 18.08.2017 passed in CWJC No. 5204 of 2017 by the learned single Judge. The dismissal of the appeal, however, will not come in the way of Mr. Niranjan Kumar assailing the decision of the Managing Director of the Federation before the forum he chooses to do so. To belie any kind of misgivings, which the learned senior advocate has expressed, let it be recorded that the adjudications and observations made either by the Minister or by the learned single Judge in the writ application especially in relation to the order dated 07.04.2017 will not create any kind of prejudice. His case will be decided on the materials and arguments which may be made before the forum concerned.

18. Appeal is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) Pawan-Ragini/-

AFR/NAFR                   A.F.R.
CAV DATE                   N/A
Uploading Date             28.04.2018
Transmission Date          N/A