Telangana High Court
K.Ratnakar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 30 April, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
W.P.Nos. 16691 & 11778 of 2023
COMMON ORDER:
In both these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking a
writ of mandamus declaring:
(i) the impugned action of the Respondents No.4 & 3,
dt.25.03.2023 & dt.21.04.2023 respectively in forcing the
petitioners to retire on attaining the age of 58 years on
30.06.2023 & 31.05.2023 respectively without any notices as
illegal and arbitrary; and
(ii) amendment to bye-laws No.32.4 and 32.5 of the
Respondent No.4 organization vide impugned proceedings
Rc.No.3747/2022-MACS/AMND, dated 25.03.2023; and
(iii) the impugned amendment certificate i.e., the service
condition of petitioners and similarly placed workmen converted
from earlier Union Governed by Co-operative Societies Act, 1964
and a Settlement under Section 18(1) of Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 reducing the age of retirement to 58 years as against 61
years under G.O.Ms.No.34, dated 21.10.2021, as in violation of
Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and contrary to
directions of the Respondent No.2 dated 14.12.2022 and also as
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of Article 14 & 21 of the
Constitution of India; and
(iv) consequently to set aside the same by further
directing the respondents to continue the petitioners in service
till they attain the age of 61 years in terms of un-amended Bye-
law No.32.4 of the respondent Nos.4 & 3 read with
G.O.Ms.No.34 dated 21.10.2021 with all consequential benefits
and reliefs and to pass such other order or orders in the interest
of justice.
2. The petitioner in W.P.No.11778 of 2023 was
appointed on contract basis as worker in the Mother Dairy (The
Nalgonda Ranga Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers Union
Limited) in the year 1993 and thereafter, the petitioner was
granted time scale applicable to the post from February, 2000.
The service conditions as are applicable to the petitioner in
W.P.No.16691 of 2023 were also applicable to the petitioner.
After conversion of the Mother Dairy into respondent No.4
society, the petitioner's services have also been converted into
respondent No.4 subject to the condition that his service
conditions would be protected and according to his service
conditions prior to conversion, the service Rules of Government
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
employees were applicable to him as well. Vide G.O.Ms.No.34
dated 21.10.2021, the Government had extended the age of
retirement to 61 years and hence the petitioner herein also was
eligible to be continued in service till 61 but when the
respondents sought to retire him from service on attaining the
age of 58 years, he filed W.P.No.11778 of 2023. Since the facts
and circumstances in both the cases are similar, this matter is
heard with W.P.No.16691 of 2023.
3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ
petitions are that the petitioner in W.P.No.16691 of 2023 was
initially appointed on contract basis as worker in the Mother
Dairy (The Nalgonda Ranga Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers
Union Limited) in 1993 and subsequently, under the directions
of the High Court in WPMP No.26647/1999 in
W.P.No.21233/1999, dated 15.10.1999 and further directions
in Contempt proceedings in C.C.No.1748/1999, dated
17.01.2000, the petitioner was granted time scale applicable o
the post from February, 2000. It is submitted that on
20.02.2023, a note was also issued informing that the Nalgonda
Ranga Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited has
been converted into MACS Act, 1995 i.e., into respondent No.4
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
Mutually Aided Co-operative Union Limited and a settlement
under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has
been reached between the Management of M/s.NARMAC and
the workmen including the petitioner and similarly placed
workmen on 30.06.2005 which has been reduced into writing as
Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.06.2005. It is
submitted that one of the condition of MOU was that 'the
workmen will accept the Service Rules and Regulations of the
Union and subsequent amendments from time to time'.
4. It is submitted that under G.O.Ms.No.34, the
respondent No.1 has enhanced the age of retirement of the
employees in all Co-operative societies from 58/60 to 61 years
as per amendment of Telangana Public Employment/Regulation
of Age of Superannuation Act, 1984 (vide Act No.3 of 2021) and
the same has been made applicable to all the employees in
Telangana State Dairy Development Co-operative Federation
Limited (TSDDCF) vide Proceedings No. 25/Per.I/Estb/2021,
dated 30.08.2021. According the petitioner, the same was also
applicable to the converted employees such as petitioners herein
whose service conditions were governed by the same regulations
prior to conversion to the respondent No.4 Mutually Aided Co-
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
operative Society. Since the service conditions which are
applicable to the Government employees were also applicable to
the employees of the respondent No.4 Mutually Aided Co-
operative Society, the petitioner and others have made
representations to the respondent No.2 on 31.10.2022,
requesting the Commissioner to implement the Regulation 32.4
& 32.5 in the respondent No.4 bye-laws i.e., extension of revised
pay scales and enhancement of age of superannuation from
58/60 to 61 years. It is submitted that the respondent No.2 vide
Proceedings Rc.No.3220/2020-PE, dated 14.12.2002, has
addressed a letter to the respondent No.5 to take necessary
action by carrying out necessary amendment to bye-laws for
enhancing age of superannuation. However, vide orders dated
21.04.2023, the respondent No.5 has issued impugned notice of
retirement to similarly placed employee i.e., K.Ratnakar Reddy
i.e., the petitioner in W.P.No.11778 of 2023, retiring him at the
age of 58 years instead of 61 years. Apprehending that the said
similar action would be taken against the petitioner herein and
that she may not be continued upto the age of 61 years and
alleging that the amendment to the bye-law as relied upon by
the respondent No.5 is contrary to Section 9-A of the Industrial
Disputes Act r/w Section 2(p) of the Telangana Co-operative
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
Societies Act, 1964 r/w Rule 28(6) of the Telangana Co-
operative Societies Rules, 1964, as illegal and arbitrary, the
present writ petition have been filed.
5. Vide orders dated 25.04.2023 this Court had
suspended the impugned proceedings dated 21.04.2023 issued
by the respondent No.3 and directed that the petitioners be
continued in service pending further orders.
6. The respondents have filed stay vacate petitions in
the writ petition and therefore, the writ petitions have been
taken up for hearing.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while
reiterating the submissions made in the writ affidavit, submitted
that the services of the petitioners herein were converted into
respondent No.4 society only on the condition of protection of
conditions of service of the employees will be on par with the
Government employees and all G.Os., issued from time to time
as were existing prior to conversion will be applicable. It is
submitted that any decision of the respondents No.4 & 5 to
amend the condition of service incorporated in bye-law No.32.4
of the bye-laws without any notice to the petitioners and
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
without following due procedure as contemplated under law is
not enforceable and therefore, petitioners have the right to
continue in service upto the age of 61 years as per the
unamended bye-laws and as per G.O.Ms.No.34, dated
21.10.2021. He therefore, sought setting aside of the impugned
orders and a consequential direction to the respondents to
continue the petitioners in service till the age of 61 years. In
support of his contentions that the petitioners are eligible to be
continued upto the age of 61 years, the learned counsel for the
petitioners has placed reliance upon the following judgment:
Paradeep Phosphates Limited Vs. State of Orissa and
Others 1;
8. The learned counsel for the respondents relied upon
the averments made in the counter affidavit filed along with stay
vacate petition and submitted that the respondent No.4 Union
was converted from TCS Act of 1964 to a society registered
under TS MACS Act of 1995 and that on 14.01.2023, the
Managing Director of the respondent No.4 Union, have
submitted the amendments to the bye-laws proposing
amendment of bye-law No.32.4 & 32.5. It is submitted that the
1 (2018) 6 SCC 195
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
General Body has issued 20 days notice prior to amendment
and a resolution thereafter was submitted to the respondent
No.3 herein for registration and accordingly, the said resolution
has been registered. It is submitted that the Assistant
Registrar/Field, Ibrahimpatnam, O/o.District Cooperative
Officer, Ranga Reddy, has submitted a feasibility report stating
that the proposals are in order according to the provisions of
Section 10 of TS MACS Act of 1995 and hence recommended to
register the amendment of bye-law Nos.32.4 & 32.5 of
respondent No.4. It is submitted that since the General Body
having resolved to pass the amendment, the petitioners are also
governed by the same and therefore, they are liable to be retired
at the age of 58 years and not at the age of 61 years. It is
submitted that G.O.Ms.No.34, dated 20.10.2021 enhancing the
age of paid servants of the Cooperative Societies from 58 years
to 61 years are applicable to the societies registered under
Telangana Cooperatives Societies Act, 1964 only and not to the
employees of the societies registered under Mutually Aided
Cooperative Societies Act, 1995. He therefore, submitted that
continuation of the petitioners herein till the age of 61 years is
placing a lot of financial burden on the respondent society and
therefore, this Court may be pleased to vacate the interim
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
orders and dismiss the writ petition. In support of his
contentions, the counsel for the respondents place reliance
upon the following judgments:
(1) Central Council For Research in Ayurvedic
Sciences and Another Vs. Bikartan Das & Others 2;
(2) Sri Konaseema Co-operative Central Bank Limted,
Amalapuram and Another Vs. N.Seetharama Raju 3.
9. Having regard to the rival contentions and the
material on record, this Court finds that both the petitioners
herein were earlier working in the Mother Diary i.e., (The
Nalgonda Ranga Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers Union
Limited) on contract basis and their services were regularized
and all the benefits as applicable to the regular employees in the
Government, were applicable to them. It is also not in dispute
that the said organization i.e., Mother Diary (The Nalgonda
Ranga Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited) was
converted into Mutually Aided Co-operative Union Limited
under the MACS Act, 1995. It is also not in dispute that at the
time of conversion, there was a settlement under Section 18(1)
of Industrial Disputes Act between the management and the
2 2023 (11) Scale 93
3 AIR 1990 AP 171 (FB)
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
workers Union (which includes the petitioners herein) and it
was decided that the workmen will accept the service rules and
regulations of the resultant union and subsequent amendment
from time to time i.e., workers have given an undertaking that
they will abide by the service rules and regulations of the Union
and subsequent amendments from time to time. The service
regulations are of the resultant union of the Nalgonda Ranga
Reddy Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited and hence
the petitioners are governed by the own bye-laws approved by
the Registrars of MACS Act, Ranga Reddy District. It is also not
in dispute that laws 32 deals with the staff of the society and
their service conditions. As seen from the proposals for
amendment of bye-laws and the minutes of the 22nd General
Body Meeting dated 27.09.2022, the Union has adopted the
provisions of G.O.Ms.No.34, dated 21.10.2021 extending the age
of retirement of its employees to 61 years. By way of an
amendment, the age of retirement for the employees who have
been converted from the earlier Mother Diary was sought to be
restricted to 58 years and not 61 years.
10. Thus, it is clear that before the amendment of the
bye-laws No.32.4 & 32.5, the age of retirement as is applicable
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
to the regular employees of the respondent No.4 society, was
also applicable to the petitioners herein. When the society
wanted to change the service conditions of its employees, even
those who have been converted from the earlier Mother Dairy, it
ought to have given notice to them. The contentions of the
respondents that the proposal was made before the General
Body and that the General Body has given a notice of 20 days
before passing the resolution, cannot be considered as a notice
given to the employees for amendment of bye-laws or
amendment of their service conditions. As held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Paradeep Phosphates Limited
(cited supra) that Section 9(A) of the Industrial Dispute Act,
makes it obligatory on the part of the employer to give advance
notice to the employee if he intends to change certain things as
envisaged under Section 9-A of the Act read with Fourth
Schedule. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also considered the
situation where the employer is bound to give a minimum of 21
days notice to the employee if the employer intends to change
any material terms of his service and the clauses of the fourth
schedule says 'withdrawal of any customary concession or
privilege or change in usage', and it was interpreted that the
'privilege' means a 'special right, advantage or immunity granted
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
or available only to a particular person or group' and such a
privilege cannot be taken away without affording an opportunity
of hearing.
11. The cases cited by the learned counsel for the
respondents have laid down that a society cannot be
characterized as 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 and
even, if it is so characterized, it is bound by its bye-laws
registered under the A.P.Cooperative Societies Act, are not
bound by the bye-laws as they are mere contractual in nature
and a contractual obligation cannot be enforced by way of a writ
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
12. However, this Court finds that the said decisions
are not applicable to the case on hand. When the petitioners,
while conversion into the MACS Act, have clearly been given an
undertaking that their service conditions would be governed by
the service conditions of the Government employees, the
respondents cannot take away that right by giving 20 days of
notice before conducting the General Body Meeting. The General
Body can only take decisions in respect of all the employees of
the society and when a particular right or privilege is granted to
a particular group of employees, the employees have to be given
TMD,J
W.P.Nos.16691 & 11778 of 2023
specific notice before taking any decision altering or amending
their service conditions. In this case, it is clearly not done,
therefore the amendments to bye-laws No.32.4 & 32.5 are in
violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be
sustained.
13. In view of the same, the petitioners are eligible to be
continued in service till they attain the age of superannuation
i.e., 61 years as is the case of employees of other employees of
the respondent No.4 Cooperative Society.
14. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are allowed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
15. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these
writ petitions, shall stand closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
Date: 30.04.2024
bak
