Allahabad High Court
Shiv Bahadur Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 17 October, 2019
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11643 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shiv Bahadur Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sujeet Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Lal,Abhishek Mishra,Padmaker Pandey Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
Short counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The petitioner being appointed as Co-operative Supervisor in the Provincial Co-operative Union under the U.P. Co-operative Federal Authority (Business) Regulation, 1976 was sent on deputation, in terms of the Rule 5 of the Regulation 1976, to discharge the duties of the Secretary of the Co-operative society namely Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Limited, Qasimpur Garhi, Block Afzal Garh, District Bijnor.
It is noteworthy that the post of Cadre Secretary, in a primary Co-operative Society is a centralized post and comes under the U.P. Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies Centralized Service Rules' 1976. By means of the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Chairman, Primary Co-operative Society, the petitioner had been repatriated to his parent department. The order of repatriation dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Chairman/Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, Bijnor is subject matter of challenge in the present petition with the submission that transfer of the petitioner is regulated by Regulation 10 of Rules' 1976 and the transfer and posting of the employees of the said Authority can be made only by the District Committee constituted under the Rules' 1976. Submission is that the Chairman of the District Committee, on his own, could not have been passed the order of transfer and posting of the petitioner i.e. for repatriating to his parent department.
A further contention has been made that the transfer/repatriation order has been passed on the pressure exerted by the employee of the primary Co-operative Society and the observation in the transfer order that the work and conduct of the petitioner was not satisfactory cast stigma upon the petitioner. No opportunity, whatsoever, has been granted to the petitioner before passing the repatriation order, therefore, the same suffers from gross violation of the principle of natural justice.
On the said submissions, vide order dated 01.10.2019 learned counsel appearing for the respondent-District Committee was granted time to file short counter affidavit to bring on record the minutes of the District Committee, if any.
In compliance thereof, short counter affidavit has been filed wherein the resolution of the District Committee dated 18.07.2019 has been brought on record. A perusal of the resolution no.2 of the District Committee indicates that the decision taken by the Chairman on 15.07.2019 for repatriation of the petitioner to his parent department was ratified.
It is further noteworthy that the petitioner had been relieved from the post of Secretary in the Primary Co-operative Society i.e. his deputation post only after the said decision was taken by the District Committee in its meeting held on 18.07.2019. The date of relieving of the petitioner from the post of Secretary is not on record but it is admitted that the petitioner had joined his parent department after repatriation on 05.09.2019.
It is evident from the record that the petitioner had been repatriated to his parent department after decision was taken by the District Committee in its meeting held on 18.07.2019, by ratification of the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Chairman of the District Committee. With the ratification of the decision taken by the Chairman, the defect or irregularity, if any, stood rectified. This is not a case where the transfer or repatriation of the petitioner to his parent department has been done prior to the decision taken by the District Administrative Committee, which is admittedly the competent authority to do so. It cannot be successfully argued that the basis of transfer or repatriation of the petitioner is the order dated 15.07.2019 of the Chairman, District Committee i.e. Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Co-operative, Bijnor. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner to challenge the transfer /repatriation order on the plea of lack of jurisdiction of the Chairman, District Committee is, therefore, found misconceived. Reliance placed on the judgement of this court in Writ-A No.4725 of 2019 (Rajendra Nath Singh Vs. State of U.P. & others) is, thus, misplaced.
Lastly, it is noteworthy that the petitioner has not been removed from service rather he has been repatriated to his parent department which does not entail any civil consequence so as to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Submission that the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Chairman, District Committee cast stigma upon the petitioner, therefore, requires no further deliberation.
The writ petition is found devoid of merits and hence dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.10.2019 Himanshu