R.K.Mahajan, J. - (1.) This is a writ petition moved by District Co-operative Federation Limited seeking direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 8.6.1984 communicated on 31.1.1987 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) and the award dated 29.9.1981 passed by the respondent No, 1 (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition). A prayer has been further made not to give effect to the impugned award by issuing a writ of mandamus. It may be mentioned at the outset that the respondent No. 3 who was employed as Manager in a Cold Storage under the control of the petitioner on 5.4.1978 was terminated later on as post of Manager-cum-Engineer was created by circular dated 29.1.1987 after amalgamating the post of Manager with the Engineer, It may be mentioned that Shri P.N. Shukla was appointed on purely temporary basis. Later on he was terminated on the basis of resolution of Committee of Management dated 23.2.1979. It appears that the matter of termination was submitted on a reference made by Shri P.N. Shukla to the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies U.P., Agra against the District Co-operative Federation. Mathura. it further appears that Deputy Registrar appointed Regional Assistant Registrar, Agra as sole arbitrator and referred the dispute for adjudication. The Arbitrator gave an award in favour of Shri Shukla and declared the termination order void. The matter was taken up in the appeal before the competent authority which was dismissed by the order dated 8.6.1984 (Annexure No. 1).
(2.) Feeling aggrieved the management has filed this writ petition. At the time of hearing only counsel for the petitioner appeared. Learned Counsel for the respondent was not present. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the wife of Shri Shukla as Shri Shukla is no more in this world. She has pleaded that Shri Shukla was appointed against the regular vacancy and it was not stated at the time of termination that the termination was done on account of new development i.e. amalgamation of post as referred above and he was not qualified to be appointed. It is alleged in the counter-affidavit that Shri Shukla was pressed hard to accept the potato stock for storage beyond the storage capacity against which the Manager protested in view of this proposed storage as any mishap in the Cold Storage was the matter of his technical responsibility and also the administrative responsibility. The management was communicated as he did not accommodate storage of 28995 bags of potato. In other words the case of respondent No. 3 is that her husband Shri Shukla was terminated on account of prejudice and antagonism and amalgamation of post is just a trick to shunt him out.
(3.) I have gone through the record carefully and also the award.;