- (1.) This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-Society challenging the judgment dated 28.9.2011 passed by the learned Member, Co-operative Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar in Service Dispute No.3 of 2010 setting aside the order dated 23.2.2008 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Gop Block and Authorized Officer, Sidheswar S.C.S Ltd., dismissing opposite party no.1 from service.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Primary Co-operative Society and is governed as per the provisions of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It is contended by the petitioner-Society that the father of opposite party no.1 was the Secretary of the Society. The Managing Committee without following the procedure appointed opposite party no.1 as Assistant Secretary of the Society without having requisite qualification which was not approved by the Registrar. The management of the Society was vested with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in the year 2006. The Chief Executive Officer, Gop Block opposite party no.3 was appointed as the Authorized Officer of the Society. A Disciplinary Proceeding was initiated against opposite party no.1 on the allegation of misappropriation of society fund, negligence of duty, disobedience of order and making the society defunct and he was suspended by order dated 08.6.2007. Accordingly charges were framed on 31.12.2007 and it was duly served on opposite party no.1. However, no explanation was submitted. One Manmohan Sahoo, Supervisor, United Puri-Nimapara Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., was appointed as the Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer called upon to opposite party no.1 to file written statement and appear before him on 15.1.2008 but opposite party no.1 failed to do so. The enquiry was conducted ex parte on the basis of materials available on record and the report was submitted on 18.1.2008. Notice was issued to opposite party no.1 for appearance before the Authorized Officer on 21.2.2008 but he did not appear. The charges having been proved against opposite party no.1, he was dismissed from service by order dated 23.2.2008. Thereafter opposite party no.1 preferred Service Dispute No.3 of 2010 before the learned Member, Co-operative Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar under Section 67-B of the Act. The Society appeared and filed its written statement raising the question of limitation. The learned Tribunal after hearing the parties by the impugned order set aside the order of dismissal dated 23.2.2008 on the ground that the period of limitation is three years in terms of Article 137 of the Limitation Act.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that opposite party no.1 filed the Service Dispute by describing himself as the Secretary of the Society with due appointment, however, he has not filed any document in support of his appointment. He further submitted that in spite of service of notice, opposite party no.1 neither participated in the enquiry nor filed his show cause and the order of dismissal was passed basing on the resolution passed by the Society on 23.2.2008. He also submitted that though the order of dismissal was passed on 23.2.2008 the Service Dispute was filed on 06.5.2010 i.e. after more than two years without filing any application for condonation of delay. The petitioner relying on the provisions under Rule 82-A (3) and 74(1) of Orissa Co-operative Societies Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') raised the question of limitation before the learned Tribunal. However, the learned Tribunal without considering the same held that the dispute is not barred by limitation. Hence the impugned judgment need be interfered with. In support of his contention he has relied on the decisions reported in 2013 (II) OLR 200 and 2015 (I) OLR 225.;