The Bahadurpur Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Limited vs The Persiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhatinda

Mehtab S.Gill, J.—The petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing award dated 3.6.1999, copy Annexure P.2.

The petitioner avers that respondent No. 2 was working as Secretary with the petitioner-Society i.e. Bahadurpur Co-operative Agricultural Service Society. The Managing Committee of the petitioner-Society removed respondent No. 2 from service vide resolution dated 27.2.1988. Respondent No. 2 filed an appeal before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bhatinda who vide his order dated 5.8.1998 held that the punishment awarded to respondent No. 2 was severe and he reduced the punishment by directing the petitioner-Society that instead of removing the respondent No. 2, he be kept in service on the post of Salesman and not on the post of Secretary. Further, the Depuly Registrar also transferred. Respondent No. 2 from Bahadurpur Co-operative Agricultural Service Society Limited to the Khatriwala Co-operative Agricultural Society. Copy of the order of Deputy Registrar has been attached as Annexure P1. The petitioner-Society vide resolution dated 25.1.1994, relieved him and sent him to Co-operative Agricultural Society, Khatriwala as per decision of the Deputy Registrar, Bhatinda.

Respondent No. 2 raised an industrial dispute and an award was passed in his favour.

Notice of motion was issued.

We have heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for respondent No. 2 and perused petition, an-nexures attached with it and the written statement.

It is an admitted case of both the parties that when respondent No. 2 joined Bahadurpur Co-operative Agricultural Society, as per orders of the Deputy Registrar, he started drawing the salary of Rs. 2405.75 as Cashier. This pay scale was equal and at par with that of the Secretary. Shri Sham Sunder who has appeared as MW/1 as management witness has stated the instead of the pay of Salesman, respondent No. 2 was being paid as a Cashier. The petitioner-Society has further claimed excess amount of pay which respondent No. 2 was drawing as a Cashier instead of Salesman. The learned Tribunal vide order dated 23.1.1998, Copy Annexure P3 has erred in holding that the amount paid in excess can legitimately be recovered from the respondent No. 2. It was the petitioner-Society which was giving this pay to respondent No. 2 continuously for five years i.e. from the date of order of Deputy Registrar, copy Annexure P1, till he was transfered to Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Khatriwala as per resolution of the petitioner-Society. Further, the petitioner-Society had no authority and power to transfer the respondent No. 2 to the other Society. This was only in the power of Deputy Registrar. The orders of the Deputy Registrar were not implemented for a long period i.e. for five years. Since the petitioner-Society did not do anything for five years, we can conclude that it had reconciled with the position that respondent No. 2 is their employee.

With the above observations, the award dated 3.6.1999, Annexure P2, is quashed and it is directed that respondent No. 2 shall work in the same position i.e. as Cashier in the petitioner-Society. The petitioner-Society is allowed to file a fresh petition before the Competent Authority if it is not satisfied with the working of respondent No. 2 and get the matter adjudicated upon once again.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations.

Order accordingly.