CWP (T) No. 9047 of 2008. Case: Manohar Lal Vs Registrar Cooperative Societies and Ors.. Himachal Pradesh High Court
| Case Number | CWP (T) No. 9047 of 2008 |
| Judges | V.K. Sharma, J. |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | March 08, 2011 |
| Court | Himachal Pradesh High Court |
Judgment:
V.K. Sharma, J., (At Shimla)
-
The petition has been filed on the following substantive prayers vide para 7(i) to (iv):
7(i) To quash and set-aside the impugned order at Annexure 'PB' dated 28.3.2002 being illegal, wrong, arbitrary and void ab-initio.
(ii) To direct the Respondents to consider the service of the applicant as continuous service w.e.f. 8.1.2000 as rendered by him.
(iii) To further direct the Respondents to clear all the pending dues of the applicant along with interest.
(iv) To declare the removal of the applicant as null and void for all purposes.
-
In reply, Respondents No. 1 to 3 have taken the following stand vide paras 3 and 6(b) and (d) on merits:
-
That the applicant was initially appointed as Honorary Secretary by the Managing Committee of the Kataru Service Society Ltd. Janjehli, Tehsil Thunag, Distt. Mandi. Subsequently, the Managing Committee of the Society appointed the applicant as Salesman vide Resolution dated 8-1-2000 on temporary basis. The services of the applicant were terminated vide Resolution dated 5-3-2001 by the Managing Committee of the Society. Thus, it is evident that neither the Respondents have appointed the applicant as Honorary Assistant Secretary/Salesman nor they have terminated his services. The applicant in the present O.A. has challenged the impugned order dated 28.03.2002 passed by the Respondent No. 2 whereby the applicant was informed by the Respondent No. 2 that his services have been terminated by the management of the Society vide Resolution dated 5-3-2001. Even if the order dated 28.3.2002 is quashed and set-aside by this Hon'ble Tribunal, the resolution dated 5-3-2001 of the Society still remains operative because the said order has nowhere been challenged by the applicant. Hence, no relief can be granted by this Hon'ble Tribunal to the applicant in the present O.A. unless the Society is impleaded as a party and order dated 5.3.2002 is challenged before the appropriate forum. Hence, the O.A. is liable to be dismissed by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
6(b) That the selection and appointment of Respondent No. 4 as Salesman has been made by the management of the Kataru Service Co-operative Society Ltd. Janjehli. As already submitted, the services of the applicant were terminated by the management of the Society and not by the replying Respondents. It is, however, admitted that the applicant preferred a representation dated 26.2.2002 to the Respondent No. 2, against the selection...
To continue reading
Request your trial