IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6262 of 2012 For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
========================================================= GUJARAT STATE COOP. AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK - Petitioner(s) Versus REGISTRAR OF COOP. SOC. & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance :
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR.ADVOCATE WITH MS.VIDHIJBHATT for Petitioner(s):1, MR. PRANAV DAVE, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 2, VIRAL K SHAH for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 04/10/2012
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:
“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to declare that the recruitment that is being consistently under taken by the respondent No.2 Bank from May 2011 to 31.03.2011 is contrary to the recognized recruitment process and the principles underlying the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to declare the failure on the part of the respondent No.1 Registrar of Cooperative Societies to take action against the respondent no.2 Bank under section 86 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 as contrary to the objectives, letter and spirit of the Act.
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to inquiry into the working of the respondent no.2 Bank, including the illegal process of recruitment that is consistently undertaken, under Section 86 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and to take suitable corrective measures.
(D) Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondent no.2 Bank permanently from appointing any class III or class IV employees on ad hoc and daily wage basis without resorting to recognized recruitment process.
(E) Pending admission and final hearing of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondent No.2 Bank from appointing persons on ad hoc or daily wage basis to class III or class IV posts without holding the recognized recruitment process.
(F) Pending admission and final hearing of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 not to take any coercive action against the members of the petitioner union.”
2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent No.2 Bank has been indulging in appointing class III and class IV employees since 1987 in illegal manner without issuing any public advertisement or by calling names from employment exchange and selecting employees after following commonly accepted recruitment process. It is further the case of the petitioner that respondent bank was trying to recruit employees contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of A. Umarani Vs. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Others, reported in (2004) 7 SCC 112.
3. Counsel for the respondent Mr. Shah relied upon the resolution No.20, passed on 11.09.2012 by which it was resolved to appoint staff by issuing advertisement in leading details and to appoint persons as per the policy laid down by the Board. The resolution passed on 11.09.2012 is taken on record.
4. In that view of the matter, the petition deserves to be allowed. The same is allowed in view of the respondents are directed to act as per the resolution dated 11.09.2012 and also the principles laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of A. Umarani (supra).
5. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
Ankit* [K S JHAVERI, J]