Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 640 (JHR)

Ramsnehi Thakur v. State of Jharkhand

2014-06-16

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2014
ORDER Heard counsel for the parties. 2. These petitioners are said to be Paid Managers under the District Cadre Cooperative Society in the district of Chaibasa, West Singhbhum. In the present writ petition they are seeking release of funds for payment of salary and other allowances which have not been paid to them since April 2011. By referring to Annexure-1 series, it has been submitted that the Registrar, Cooperative Societies had released funds for payment of salary for such Paid Managers and Member Secretaries working in the different District Cadre Cooperative Societies in the District of Ranchi, Sahibganj, Dumka and Palamau where after they were also paid their salary for the relevant period. They are said to be belonging to West Singhbhum Cooperative Society. It is pointed out that para 6 of the said letter indicated that if the performance of the individual Paid Managers were found to be fetching less than 40% of the outstanding principal demand in the concerned area their services were to be terminated along with simultaneous payment of arrears of salary. It is further submitted that the State- Respondents have taken a U-turn and refused to grant any fund for payment of arrears of salary of these petitioners who are working since long under District Cadre Cooperative Society as Paid Manager. Therefore, they have approached this Court for the instant relief. 3. The State respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. A specific stand has been taken on their behalf that the petitioners are not Government servant. They have failed to clear the examination conducted for regularization/absorption of the service of such Paid Managers in terms of the direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of State of Bihar Vrs. Bihar Rajya Sahakarita Prabandhak Seva Sangh, Patna and others reported in 1998(8) SCC 218 . They have also stated that those-2-who have appeared and passed the examination conducted by the State Government have been regularized in other departments of the State and are being paid salary from the State coffer. It is the specific stand of the respondents that petitioners being the Paid Managers, their salary is to be borne out from the contribution received from LAMPS / PACS and Central Cooperative Bank which is to be earmarked in the ratio of 1.75% and 0.50% of the recovery made respectively from PACS/LAMPS and Central Cooperative Bank. It is the specific stand of the respondents that petitioners being the Paid Managers, their salary is to be borne out from the contribution received from LAMPS / PACS and Central Cooperative Bank which is to be earmarked in the ratio of 1.75% and 0.50% of the recovery made respectively from PACS/LAMPS and Central Cooperative Bank. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the liability of the payment of salary of such employees of the District Cadre Cooperative Society does not lie on the State Government as the Society is a Cooperative Society which has to bear its expenditure and establishment expenses from its own resources as conceived under the circular no. 503 dated 31.5.1989. However stand has been taken that upon direction passed in the case of other similarly placed Paid Managers seeking salary from the State coffer in the respective writ petitions, the final order was also passed on 31.7.2013 by the Principal Secretary of the Government, department of Cooperative, Annexure-G of their counter affidavit inter-alia taking the same stand and rejecting their claim. On the basis of the Government Circular dated 31.5.1989 it is submitted that these petitioners are not entitled for any relief as they have failed to make out any legal right for such payments. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in his oral rejoinder submitted that there is no reason for the respondents to discontinue the practice of release of grant in favour of the Cooperative Society for payment of salary of such persons which has greatly prejudiced their case. No averment has been made by the respondents that performance of these persons are below the yardstick in the manner of recovery of outstanding demand of the Society in question. Therefore, the respondents be directed to grant the arrears of salary of these petitioners. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the relevant materials on record. It is evident from the pleadings and relevant annexures of the affidavit adduced on behalf of either of the parties is that these petitioners are not Government Servant. They have failed to get regularized in the Government Service after opportunities granted in terms of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vrs. Bihar Rajya Sahakarita Prabandhak Seva Sangh, Patna and others (supra) by facing examination conducted for the said purpose. They have failed to get regularized in the Government Service after opportunities granted in terms of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vrs. Bihar Rajya Sahakarita Prabandhak Seva Sangh, Patna and others (supra) by facing examination conducted for the said purpose. The Society in question is constituted under the Cooperative Societies Act and now adopted by the State of Jharkhand and the Rules framed there under. Their service conditions are governed by the Rules of 1959 i.e. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies Act, 1959. Such persons have also not been granted enhancement of retirement age and plea for such enhancement of retirement age has been rejected by learned Single Bench of this Court in W.P.S. No. 814 of 2005 . On perusal of Annexure-C, the circular dated 31.5.1989 it appears that the expenditure relating to the establishment cost and payment of salary etc of such Paid Managers was to be borne out by the funds generated by the Society through recovery of loans advanced by the said Primary Agricultural Society. The State may have in its wisdom chosen to release grant from time to time dependent upon consideration of facts relevant for such decision. However, it is evident that the petitioners did not have a legal right to claim release of fund and for payment of their salary by the State as they are not the State Government employees rather are Paid Managers working under the Cooperative Society in question. The petitioners have also failed to show that there is any consistent policy decision of the State Government to bear the salary and establishment cost of the Cooperative Society in question for payment of salary of these petitioners. 6. Therefore, the petitioners have failed to make out case for interference and for issuance of writ or direction for release of funds for payment of salary and its arrears in their favour. 7. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.