The Calcutta High Court reaffirmed that prolonged suspension and undue delay in concluding disciplinary proceedings by a co-operative society are contrary to the principles of natural justice, and directed conclusion within a fixed timeframe. This judgment follows existing precedent and clarifies procedural obligations upon such societies, having binding value for subordinate courts dealing with similar disciplinary matters.
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 |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within Calcutta High Court’s jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Service Law / Administrative Law / Co-operative Societies |
| Questions of Law | Whether, and to what extent, disciplinary proceedings by a co-operative society can be kept pending indefinitely, and whether such delay violates principles of natural justice. |
| Ratio Decidendi | The court held that prolonged suspension and delayed disciplinary proceedings cause hardship to the affected person and violate principles of natural justice. The Board of the Cooperative Society was directed to complete the proceedings, giving the petitioner reasonable opportunity of hearing and strictly adhering to the principles of natural justice. Timeframe fixed is preferably within four months from the date of communication of the order. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petitioner was suspended since 21st May, 2021, and disciplinary proceedings had not been concluded. Representation to the Board and disciplinary authority was sent but was returned as “refused”. There was also earlier direction dated 13th October, 2023 to conclude the proceedings. No appearance from the Co-operative Society or its Board/disciplinary authority. |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and authorities under the jurisdiction of Calcutta High Court in disciplinary actions against co-operative society employees. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and service tribunals dealing with analogous situations regarding discipline in co-operative societies. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The judgment clarifies that disciplinary proceedings by a co-operative society must be concluded within a reasonable time and not left pending indefinitely.
- Suspension pending disciplinary proceedings, if prolonged, may be challenged as violative of natural justice.
- Reasonable opportunity of hearing is mandatory before deciding disciplinary proceedings.
- Lawyers may cite this as binding authority for seeking expeditious disposal in similar disciplinary actions.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted the petitioner’s suspension since 21st May 2021 and the failure to conclude disciplinary proceedings despite earlier judicial direction (dated 13th October 2023).
- The petitioner’s attempts at communication and representations were established by affidavit of service, though refused by the society.
- The respondents submitted that the board is validly constituted, thus there is no impediment to proceed.
- Relying on the peculiar facts, especially the long-pending suspension, the court held that continued delay is not justified and “no fruitful purpose” would be served by keeping the writ pending.
- Direction was issued to the Board to complete the proceeding within four months, strictly following principles of natural justice and granting reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The disciplinary proceeding, subject matter of prior judicial direction, has not been concluded despite repeated representations.
- Representations to Board/disciplinary authority by speed post returned “refused.”
- Suspension has been continuing since 21st May 2021, entailing hardship and pendency for an unreasonable period.
Respondent Nos. 2-4 (through Mr. Sureka)
- There is a valid Board of Directors.
- No impediment in concluding disciplinary proceedings exists.
Factual Background
The petitioner, aggrieved by continued suspension since 21st May 2021 without conclusion of disciplinary proceedings, had made representations to the Board of Directors and disciplinary authority of the co-operative society. The court had earlier directed, on 13th October 2023, for conclusion of the proceedings. The co-operative society and its disciplinary/board authorities did not respond to notices, and representations sent by speed post were returned marked “refused.” The disciplinary action thus remained pending, prompting the writ petition.
Statutory Analysis
- The court invoked and applied the “principles of natural justice.”
- The requirement to give the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing was reiterated.
- No specific provision of any statute was interpreted beyond reference to natural justice and fair procedure in disciplinary matters by co-operative societies.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
- The petitioner was granted leave to file a supplementary affidavit of service in respect of the returned envelope.
- The court fixed a specific time frame (“within four months from the date of communication of the order”) for conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, introducing a procedural precedent for time-bound disposal.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The Court followed settled principles of natural justice regarding timely completion of disciplinary proceedings and fair opportunity of hearing.
Citations
No case law citations or neutral citations were specified in the judgment text.