The Calcutta High Court reaffirms that disciplinary proceedings against suspended employees of co-operative societies must be completed within a reasonable time, and insists on adherence to the principles of natural justice. The decision upholds established principles and is binding on co-operative societies within the jurisdiction.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/19097/2025 of MOZAMMEL SK. ALIAS MOZAMMEL HAQUE Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0383912025 |
| Date of Registration | 18-08-2025 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Single Bench (HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY) |
| Precedent Value | Binding within Calcutta High Court jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Service Law / Administrative Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether disciplinary proceedings can be kept pending indefinitely and whether principles of natural justice must be followed during such proceedings. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petitioner challenged the prolonged suspension since 21 May 2021 and non-conclusion of disciplinary proceedings by the co-operative society. Despite prior directions and valid service of representations, the authorities failed to act, prompting judicial intervention. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and co-operative societies within the jurisdiction of Calcutta High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and tribunals dealing with delay in disciplinary proceedings by co-operative bodies |
| Follows | Mandate under principles of natural justice and fair opportunity of hearing |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reiterates that disciplinary proceedings in co-operative societies cannot be kept pending indefinitely, especially in cases involving suspension.
- Establishes a clear timeline (preferably within four months) for conclusion of such proceedings with due process.
- Refusal or non-acceptance of valid service by respondent authorities does not excuse their inaction.
- Mandates adherence to principles of natural justice before reaching any decision against the petitioner.
- Lawyers can rely on this judgment to demand time-bound resolutions of disciplinary actions in similar contexts.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the extended suspension of the petitioner since May 2021 and the failure of the co-operative society to complete disciplinary proceedings despite earlier directions.
- The Court observed that mere inaction or avoidance by the respondents (including refusal of service) cannot justify indefinite delay.
- Citing the need for procedural fairness, the Court directed that the Board must give a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
- The court underscored that the principles of natural justice must be followed in disciplinary proceedings.
- Ultimately, the Court ordered the disciplinary process to be concluded within four months from communication of the order.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The co-operative society failed to conclude disciplinary proceedings despite directions dated 13 October 2023.
- The petitioner’s representation to the Board and disciplinary authority was not considered; postal records indicated “refused” service by the authorities.
Respondent (Nos. 2–4)
- Submitted that there is a valid Board of Directors in place, so there is no impediment to concluding the disciplinary proceedings.
Factual Background
The petitioner, an employee of a Co-operative Society, had been under suspension since 21 May 2021. Despite a prior direction dated 13 October 2023 to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, the matter remained pending. The petitioner’s attempts to communicate his representation to the relevant authorities were unsuccessful, with postal records noting “refused” service. This lack of action prompted the petitioner to seek relief from the High Court.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment addresses the principles of natural justice as applicable to disciplinary proceedings in co-operative societies.
- It mandates that proceedings be concluded expeditiously and not be kept pending without justification.
- Reliance on procedural fairness was emphasized, with the court directing that the petitioner be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions were recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court permitted the petitioner to remedy technical defects in service (by filing a supplementary affidavit of service).
- The Court adopted a pragmatic approach to ensure proceedings move forward, addressing non-cooperation by respondent authorities.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision affirms and clarifies existing principles relating to natural justice and timely disciplinary proceedings.
Citations
No SCC / AIR / MANU / neutral citations or reportable status are mentioned in the judgment excerpt.