- (1.) B. S. Chauhan, J. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the reversion order dated 2-11-1987 con tained in Annexure 6 to the writ petition, by which the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Secretary, Manila Upbhogta Sahkari Samiti Ltd. to the post of Shop Manager.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that she had been appointed as Shop Manager in Kachehari Shakha with the respondent society on 21-2-84 on the basis of commission at the rate of 4% on profit of sale proceeds and she was appointed as Secretary of the respondent society with effect from 18-12-86 and her appointment was duly approved in the administrative meeting of the respondents society and approval was accorded to her appoint ment as Secretary by the District Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, Jaunpur vide order dated 15-12-1986. However, the petitioner was reverted to the post of Shop Manager by the impugned order. Hence this writ petition. The respondents had filed the counter-affidavit wherein a preliminary objection has been raised by the respon dents that the respondent society is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction as it is a co- operative Society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, (hereinafter called as the Act) and no rules whatsoever have been framed under Sec tions 121, 122 and 122-A of the Act and thus, the services of the Secretary of the respondent society were not governed by any statutory rule and petitioner cannot seek redressal of her grievances under Ar ticle 226 of the Constitution of India. At the time of hearing, Shri Ashok Bhushan, learned Counsel for the respon dents has raised the same preliminary ob jection and for the time being the matter has been heard only on the issue of main tainability of the writ petition. Shri M. D. Singh Shekhar and Shri G. N. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner have taken us through various provisions of the Act and the bye-law framed by the respondent society and their averment is that as the services of the Secretary are governed by the provisions of Section 31 of the Act, the removal of the petitioner from the said post is illegal and the petition is maintainable.
(3.) A Full Bench of this Court has considered this aspect in Radha Charan Sharma v. U. P. Co-operative Federation and others, 1982 UPLBEC 89, and after con sidering a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court and of this Court came to the conclusion that the Co-operative society is not amenable to the writ jurisdic tion as the bye-laws framed by the Co operative societies do not have any statutory force and no rule involving a duty of public nature is violated. This view has consistently been followed by this Court and recently in Ram Lakhan Pathak v. District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kanpur and others, 1996 (1) ESC 32, this Court has held that in such a case the conditions of service of the employees are not governed by any statutory rule or regulation. The co-operative society is not an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution nor it is an instrumentality of the State nor it exercises any statutory power or discharges statutory/public duties and writ petition is nit maintainable against a co-operative society.;