Pasula Madhava Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9731 AP

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

                   WRIT PETITION No. 4906 of 2021

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner having aggrieved by

the action of the 5th respondent in passing Resolution dated 02-08-2019

removing him from service on the ground of personal reasons and to declare

the same as illegal, arbitrary, without Jurisdiction and contrary to the services

regulations of the 5th respondent society and also violative of the Principles

of Natural Justice and un-Constitutional.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the

official and unofficial respondents.

The case of the petitioner in brief, that he was initially appointed as

Clerk in the 5th respondent Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited

in the month of March 2015 on daily wage basis, by the 5th respondent

society by Resolution No.2 dated 02-03-2015. Later he was appointed on

regular salary basis as clerk on 16-06-2015 by Resolution No.1 dated 16-07-

2015. Since then he has been discharging his duties with utmost sincerity and

to the satisfaction of his superior officers and respondent organization without

any blemish or remarks. He further submits that then regular pay scale was

extended by the society in terms of G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 22-06-2009

including provident fund deductions. As per the statement of account of his

salary has been paying through the DCC bank, Kurnool, which clearly shows

that petitioner is a regular employee of the society.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been

discharging his duties with utmost satisfaction of the 5th respondent society

from 2015 to 2019 without any break. He further submits that in view of the

change of administration after the general elections in the year 2019, the three

men committee was appointed by the managing committee to look after the

affairs of 5th respondent. After takeover of the management of the society by

the three men committee, the 5th respondent represented by the three men

committee within a short period passed the impugned resolution on

02.08.2019, terminating the services of the petitioner due to personal scores,

for the reasons best known to them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that since the

petitioner is continuing as one of the regular staff of the 5th respondent and

his salary was enhanced and his nature of services were also changed by

virtue of resolution dated 13.06.2015 under which he was conferred regular

salary at rupees 4,500 per month by which he became one of the regular staff

member of the 5th respondent society on 16-06-2015.

He further contends that the petitioner completed 5 years of service at

5th respondent society. But the present managing committee nominated by

the 1st respondent without observing due process of law and without

following the principles of natural justice, got terminated the services of the

petitioner which is illegal and arbitrary.

He further contends that the services of the petitioner were regularised

by virtue of resolution No.3 dated 16.07.2015 under which he conferred

regular pay scale as per the G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 22.06.2009 issued by the

first respondent here in. In view of the same the petitioner has entitled to all

the benefits as regular employee and he has been continuing as regular

employee from 16.07.2015. The learned counsel for the petitioner further

submits that as per the Section 51 and Section 59 of the Andhra Pradesh

Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, the respondent authority shall not take any

action against the staff of the society for their misappropriation or

misconduct without conducting any enquiry.

He further contends that the 5th respondent committee does not have

any authority for appointment or removal of staff without prior approval of

the registrar as per the clause 17 of circular issued by the 2nd respondent

dated 30.09.2019. He further contends that in view of the utter violation of the

provisions of the Act and rules made there under the impugned resolution

dated 02.08.2019 is liable to be set aside. The petitioner is entitled for

reinstatement as well as back wages.

On the other hand the learned counsel for the 5th respondent would

submit that the petitioner was initially appointed by the 5th respondent

society on 02.03.2015 only on temporary basis as daily wage clerk. The daily

wage employee is not entitled to any observation of principles of natural

justice and due process of law for the purpose of removal. Moreover, as per

the service regulation of the society rule 8 provides for statutory appeal before

the appellate authority. In view of the availability of alternative remedy, the

writ petition is not maintainable.

He also contends that since the petitioner is temporary employee who

has been appointed on the temporary basis for special purposes/ special

period, he cannot claim any observation of the principles of natural justice.

Therefore the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned standing counsel for the 5th respondent, the contention

of the petitioner is that even though the petitioner was initially appointed as

temporary employee on 02.03.2015 but later on 16.07.2015 after completion

of six months of service, the services of the petitioner were regularised by the

5th respondent by implementing the pay scale as per the G.O.Ms.No.151

dated 22.06.2009, is valid and acceptable, in view of the resolution passed by

the society to that effect, which is the competent authority. The other

contention of the petitioner states that the impugned resolution dated

02.08.2019 was passed due to the personal scores without there being any

fault of the petitioner against the provisions of the act and also rules made

there under and without observing principles of natural justice is sustainable.

In view of the law laid down by this Court as well as Hon'ble Apex

Court in etcetera of judgments that the principles of natural justices shall be

observed by any authority while taking decision, it is a part and parcel of the

principles of administration of law.

In view of the proceedings dated 16.07.2015 and conferring the scale

as per the rules framed under G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 22.06.2009to the

petitioner is nothing but converting the nature of the employment of the

petitioner from temporary to regular employment, it is implied that the

petitioner is regularised. The other contention of the learned counsel for the

respondent is that the petitioner shall avail alternative remedy of statutory

appeal before the authority which can be distinguished, in the absence of non

observation of due process of law as well as principles of natural justice.

In view of the law laid down by this Court as well as the Apex Court is

when the fundamental rights or legal rights of the petitioner were infringed

and the authorities have not observed the principles of natural justice and

violated the provisions of the Act, 1964. This Court cannot force the

petitioner to avail alternative remedy and so the contention of the standing

counsel is negatived.

In view of the foregoing discussion facts and circumstances as stated

above, the impugned resolution dated 02.08.2019 is liable to be set aside and

the present writ petition is allowed.

Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dated 02.08.2019 are set aside

and the respondent Nos. 3 to 6 are directed to reinstate the petitioner and pay

him all consequential monetary benefits as entitled to the petitioner, in

accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period

of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ

petition shall stand closed.

____________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 18th November, 2022 MH

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

Writ Petition No. 4906 of 2021

18thNovember, 2022 MH