- (1.) The appellants, being aggrieved by the defeasance of their decision to compulsorily retire the respondent herein from service vide judgment and order dated 27.2.2004 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5223/2003, are in appeal. We have heard Dr.P.S.Bhati, learned A.A.G. assisted by Mr.Ravinder Singh, for the appellants and Mr.M.R.Singhvi, Sr.Advocate, assisted by Mr.Mohit Singhvi, for the respondent/ writ petitioner.
(2.) The thumbnail facts available from the rival pleadings and indispensable for the present adjudication are that the respondent/writ petitioner was initially appointed as L.D.C. with the appellant-Organization and was eventually promoted as Junior Accountant, Accountant and Manager in succession. His service conditions were governed by the Rajathan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965, since repealed and substituted by the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 (for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Act") and the Rules framed thereunder. The Registrar of the Cooperative Societies of Rajasthan in terms of Rule 41 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Rules, 1966 (for short hereinafter referred-to as "the Rules") framed the Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesale/Kraya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti's Employees' Service Conditions, 1991 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the Service Conditions"). According to the respondent/writ petitioner, in spite of his best efforts, while he was working as General Manager, the Organization was running in loss but in view of his unstinted devotion and efforts, he could soon consolidate its financial position. For the overall institutional well being, he also put in extra efforts. As claimed by him, he ventured into new initiatives with that mission and achieved infrastructural enhancements in all respects. He, thus, has sought to project his commendable and laudable service profile. He, however, admitted that on the basis of the memorandum of charges dated 24.1.1991, a Departmental Enquiry was initiated against him but he was eventually exonerated of the charges.
(3.) That he was again chargesheeted by the memorandum dated 1.12.1998, which too came to be dropped ultimately, was stated. He did assert that at no point of time, except these two incidents, he had either been subjected to any disciplinary action or even communicated with any adverse remark. The respondent/writ petitioner, however, alleged that the respondent No.4 was unnecessarily annoyed with him so much so that he even lodged a false complaint against him before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jaipur in April, 2001, which was however finally not pursued, as the allegations levelled against him were found to be untrue. While the matter rested at that, by order dated 5.9.2003, following deliberations in the meeting of the Committee, as contemplated in Condition 25 of the Service Conditions, he was compulsorily retired. As a consequence thereof, he was offered two Bankers Cheque for sums of Rs.37,312/- and Rs.18,656/-, aggregating to Rs.55,968/-, by way of payment of his dues towards service entitlements. The respondent/writ petitioner alleged that these too, were at the instance of the respondent No.4. He, thus, approached this court seeking annulment of the order of compulsory retirement alleging that the said decision was patently punitive in nature and further vitiated by the malafide of the respondent No.4. The appellants herein (respondents No.3 and 4 in the writ petitioner) at the threshold contended that the writ proceeding was not maintainable in the face of alternative remedy of an appeal under the Service Conditions. They, in essence, sought to contend that not only the date of birth, as provided by him at the entry in service, was doubtful, as the same, if accepted, he would have been at that time aged 16 years and ten months, but also averred that his promotions to the posts of Junior Accountant, Accountant and to that of Manager, had not been in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and instead, was the yield of misuse of his office, including tampering of service records. Referring to Condition 25 of the Service Conditions, the answering respondents stated that in terms thereof, a Committee as envisaged therein had been constituted by the Joint Registrar, Marketing, Jaipur vide his lettter dated 28.8.2003 and following due deliberations thereof (Committee) on 5.9.2003, an unanimous decision was taken to compulsorily retire him from service. The respondents averred that in the said meeting amongst others, the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bikaner as the representative of the Registrar, Cooperative Department, Deputy Registrar (Marketing) Cooperative Society, Jaipur as an expert and the General Manager as the representative of the apex body, were present.;