The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of a second appeal against an order regarding retiral dues on grounds of limitation. The Court found the explanation for delay insufficient and refused to interfere with the Tribunal's order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 / 3
2024:CGHC:39370
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP227 No. 175 of 2024
Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.
. .. Petitioner
versus
Shiv Kumar Nagar Retired Supervisor, Behind F.C.I Colony, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
| ... Respondent | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| For Petitioner | : |
Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate. | |
| For Respondent | : |
Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Advocate. |
(Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Order on Board
04/10/2024
1. By way of filing instant writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the President, Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) whereby second appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 28.06.2023 passed by Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Raipur District Raipur has been dismissed, as barred by limitation.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that vide order dated 16.03.2021 (Annexure P-2), Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Sarguja Division, Ambikpur directed the petitioner to pay a total sum of Rs. 2,13,935/- to the
2 / 3
respondent/applicant against his retiral dues. That order was challenged by petitioner by filing first appeal before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Raipur on 15.07.2022, which was dismissed by the Registrar vide order dated 28.06.2023 (Annexure P-4) on the ground of delay in filing appeal. Against which, the petitioner preferred appeal bearing Appeal No. 0/2023 before Chhattisgarh Cooperative Appellate Tribunal, Bilaspur (henceforth ‘Tribunal’), which has also been dismissed at threshold on the ground of delay, as it has been filed after two months from the prescribed limitation under the law. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that said delay occurred due to some official communication, therefore, the delay in filing appeal is bonafide & unintentional, hence, Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal, Raipur ought to have condoned the delay, but without considering aforesaid facts, has dismissed appeal filed by the petitioner- Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank, hence, it is prayed that this petition may be allowed and impugned order dated 16.01.2024 passed by C.G. Cooperative Tribunal may be set aside and the Tribunal may be directed to hear the appeal filed by the petitioner by registered the same in accordance with law.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that first appeal (un-numbered) was filed by petitioner after about delay of one year and second appeal (un-numbered) was also filed after delay of about about two months whereas, the limitation prescribed for filing appeal under Section 78 (3) of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 is 60 days, but petitioner was very much reluctant in filing appeal in time and it has not shown any sufficient cause for the delay in filing appeal, hence, the order impugned does not suffer from any illegality or perversity warranting interference of this Court in the instant writ petition.
4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts & circumstances of the case, particularly, considering the fact that not only first appeal was filed by the petitioner after huge delay, but second appeal was also filed after
3 / 3
delay of more than one month and cause shown by the petitioner for the said delay is not found to be sufficient.
6. Further, issue involved in the instant case is with regard to payment of retiral dues to the respondent. When specific question was posed to the learned counsel for the petitioner that whether retiral dues, as has been ordered by Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society vide Annexure P-2, has been paid or not, then he submits that does not know about the said fact.
7. Taking into consideration the fact that case pertains to the payment of retiral dues to the respondent/employee, who is said to be retired from service in the year 2010, despite that it seems that said retiral dues has not been paid to him, hence, considering the totality of the case, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the order impugned warranting interference of this Court in the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
8. Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of substance, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge
Amit
Digitally signed AMIT by AMITKUMAR DUBEY KUMAR Date: 2024.10.14 DUBEY 10:43:14 +0530
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing second appeal before the Cooperative Tribunal was sufficiently condoned given the explanation offered.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the second appeal as barred by limitation warrants judicial interference.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank, Ambikapur
Shiv Kumar Nagar
Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
