Mukesh Verma vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

J.S. Khehar, C.J.—The appellant is an employee of the Balda Cooperative Society Limited, Block-2, Roorkee, district Haridwar (hereinafter referred to as the Society). On 4.1.2008, the Committee of Management of the Society resolved to terminate his services. Thereafter, based on the aforesaid resolution of the Committee of Management, by an order dated 31.1.2008, the services of the appellant were actually terminated. The order of termination dated 31.1.2008 was, however, cancelled/annulled by the Administrator on the very next day i.e. on 1.2.2008.

The Chairman of the society, then, passed an order dated 24.7.2008, wherein he directed that the appellant should be paid his wages as he was discharging his duties, and also, because an inquiry was pending. The order passed by the Chairman of the society was annulled by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies vide an order dated 24.9.2008. A similar order to the same effect was again passed on 10.10.2008.

The resolution dated 4.1.2008 was approved by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies by an order dated 1.9.2008. Even after the approval of the aforesaid resolution, no formal order of termination was issued to the appellant. It is, therefore, that the appellant claimed wages. On being denied wages, the appellant approached this Court by filing Writ Petition (S/S) No. 89 of 2010. The solitary contention raised by the appellant, during the course of hearing of the writ petition, was that no formal order of termination had been issued to him, and as such, he was entitled to wages till such an order was issued to him. The aforesaid contention advanced on behalf of the appellant was repelled by this Court, when a learned Single Judge dismissed Writ Petition (S/S) No. 89 of 2010 by an order dated 9.6.2010.

The appellant has approached this Court by filing the instant Special Appeal, so as to assail the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 9.6.2010, whereby Writ Petition (S/S) No. 89 of 2010 was dismissed.

The solitary contention advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant, during the course of hearing of the instant Special Appeal was, that till date no express order has been passed by his Appointing Authority, or by any other authority whereby his services have been terminated. Thus viewed, the appellant claims wages.

During the course of hearing, we asked learned Counsel for the respondents to invite our attention to any order that may have been passed by the Appointing Authority against the appellant terminating his services. Unfortunately, learned Counsel for the respondents could not bring to our notice any order, which has been issued by the Appointing Authority, or any other authority, terminating the services of the appellant. Needless to mention, that in the first instance, such an order was passed on 31.1.2008, whereby the appellant''s services were terminated, however, the aforesaid order was subsequently revoked on the very next day i.e. on 1.2.2008.

Since no order has been passed by the Competent Authority terminating the services of the appellant, we are satisfied that the claim raised by the appellant through the instant Special Appeal deserves to be allowed, inasmuch as till the services are terminated, he is entitled to wages. We are also of the view, that the passing of the resolution dated 4.1.2008 and its approval by the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, are a matter of internal functioning of the society, and would not have the effect of terminating the services of the appellant. The competent authority could (rather should) have passed an order to give effect to the resolution dated 4.1.2008, after it had been approved by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The factual position as it stands at the present juncture is, that the services of the appellant have not been terminated by an order passed by the Appointing Authority, or by any other authority. The appellant is most definitely entitled to wages till he is removed from the employment of the Society. The respondents are, accordingly, directed to calculate the wages payable to the appellant, and to release the same to him, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Inspite of the directions issued hereinabove, it is also imperative for us to notice, that the Committee of Management had resolved on 4.1.2008 to terminate the services of the appellant. The aforesaid resolution was approved by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies on 1.9.2008. After the approval of the resolution of the Committee of Management by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, it was imperative for the Competent Authority to issue a termination order to the appellant forthwith. Such a termination order was, however, not issued by the Competent Authority. The wages, which have been ordered to be released to the appellant, are, therefore, as a consequence of the non-discharge of duties at the hands of the Appointing Authority. As such, the wages payable to the appellant, as have been ordered hereinabove, must therefore, be recovered from the Appointing Authority and not from the funds of the society. Ordered accordingly.

It shall be open to the Competent Authority to pass a formal order in furtherance of the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 4.1.2008, if it is so advised, in accordance with law.

The instant Special Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.