AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal is filed against the judgment and order
dated March 28, 2017, passed by a Hon''ble Single Judge in
Writ Petition No 13447 of 2017. While entertaining the
writ petition, by issuing Rule nisi, His Lordship passed an
interim order directing that all further proceedings would
be subject to the further orders of this court. His Lordship,
however, refused to pass an interim order as prayed for in
the writ petition.
In this appeal, the question is as to whether Mr
P. Nagaraju [Nagaraju, for short], the Chairman of the
Karnataka Co-operative Milk Producers'' Federation Limited
[hereinafter referred to as the ''Federation'', for short], has
resigned or not?
Nagaraju was elected as the Chairman of the
Federation on September 17, 2014, for a period of five
years. His tenure would, otherwise, continue till 2019.
There was some apprehension in the mind of Nagaraju
that he may be removed from the office and, therefore, on
February 25, 2017, he forwarded a note to the managing
director of the Federation that there has been political
pressure for the past few months that he should resign
from the office of the Chairman of the Federation. He,
categorically, expressed that he has no intention to resign.
It is alleged that on March 3, 2017, Nagaraju
submitted his handwritten resignation letter. However,
the resignation is, seriously, disputed. It is contended
that the handwritten resignation letter is a manufactured
one.
Mr. Ananth Mandagi, learned senior advocate,
appearing for the appellant, submits that in spite of
repeated demands by Nagaraju, a copy of the purported
handwritten resignation letter was not handed over him.
Mr. Madhusudan R. Naik, learned advocate
general, Mr. Jayakumar S. Patil and Mr. D. N. Nanjunda
Reddy, learned senior advocates appearing for the
contesting respondents, jointly, submit that Nagaraju had,
in fact, submitted his resignation and such disputed
question of fact, as to whether Nagaraju has submitted his
resignation or not, cannot be decided in writ proceeding.
It is submitted that once a resignation is
tendered, the acceptance is automatic by statutory
provisions. In fact, a meeting was held on March 25,
2017, in which, Nagaraju participated. In the said
meeting, resignation of Nagaraju was accepted.
It is submitted, therefore, that the Hon''ble
Single Judge was right in not passing an interim order.
We are of the opinion that when the Hon''ble
Single Judge entertained the writ petition, by issuing Rule
nisi, and when there is a serious allegation that the
handwritten resignation letter dated March 3, 2017, was a
manufactured one, and in view of the existence of the
communication dated February 25, 2017, by Nagaraju to
the managing director of the Federation, the Hon''ble Single
Judge should have gone a little deep into the matter and
considered the request for an interim order in the presence
of all concerned.
We, therefore, feel that justice will be sub-served
if the matter is sent back to the Hon''ble Single Judge with
a request to reconsider the prayer for an order of
injunction, in the presence of all the parties. Till such
time, the parties are directed to maintain status quo, as of
today.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ appeal
stands disposed of.
In view of disposal of the writ appeal, IA-I of
2017 for stay does not survive for consideration and it is,
therefore, dismissed accordingly.
We make no order as to costs.