Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between a co-operative society and its employee regarding the termination of the employee's services. The employee, who had been working as a Helper, challenged the termination order issued on May 25, 1978, claiming that he had not abandoned his job. The High Court had previously set aside the termination, leading to the appeal by the co-operative society. The Supreme Court examined the relevant provisions of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, and the U.P. Co-operative Societies Employees’ Service Regulations, 1975. It noted that the termination was effectively a removal from service, which required adherence to specific disciplinary procedures that were not followed, including the absence of a chargesheet and an inquiry. The court upheld the High Court's decision to reinstate the employee but ruled that he was not entitled to back pay for the period he did not work, as he had not joined his new posting without valid reasons. The court allowed the appeal in part, emphasizing the importance of following due process in employment matters.
Headnote
A) Employment Law - Termination of Service - Procedural Violations - U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, Section 122 - The court found that the termination of the respondent's services was not valid as no disciplinary proceedings were initiated, and the required procedures under the regulations were not followed. Held that the respondent must be reinstated, but not entitled to pay for the period of absence (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the respondent's services was valid under the applicable regulations and laws.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's order setting aside the termination of the respondent's services, directing reinstatement but denying back pay for the period of absence.
Law Points
- Disciplinary proceedings
- Termination of service
- Employee rights
- Co-operative societies regulations
- Procedural fairness
