Facts
The petitioner, a Deputy Manager, faced two charge memos issued by the third respondent on 5 March 2026.
Source reference: p. 2He sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings and, consequentially, to permit him to resign.
Source reference: p. 2He complained that the proceedings had not progressed and that requested documents had not been supplied.
Source reference: p. 2The third respondent submitted that some documents had been furnished, the others were available for inspection, and the petitioner had not submitted an explanation to the charges.
Source reference: p. 2–3Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to provide access to the relevant documents and conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a specified period.
Source reference: p. 2–42. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to resign as consequential relief.
Source reference: p. 2Law Applied
The Court considered Article 226 of the Constitution, under which the petitioner sought mandamus.
Source reference: p. 1Rule 11 of the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules in the third respondent Society’s bye-laws, which the Court identified as governing the appointment of an enquiry officer.
Source reference: p. 4–5Reasoning
The Court considered the petitioner’s complaint of delay and non-supply of documents alongside the third respondent’s submission that some documents had been furnished and the remaining documents were available for inspection.
Source reference: p. 3–5It directed the petitioner to attend and inspect the documents, and to submit his explanation by a fixed date.
Source reference: p. 3–5It then required the respondents to appoint an enquiry officer in accordance with Rule 11 and conclude the proceedings within three months thereafter.
Source reference: p. 3–5The Court did not separately discuss or determine the request for permission to resign.
Source reference: p. 3–5Holding
The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to appear on 13 October 2026, for the respondents to furnish relevant documents and permit inspection of the remaining documents, and for the petitioner to submit his explanation by 16 October 2026.
The respondents were directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, after appointing an enquiry officer as prescribed by Rule 11, within three months thereafter.
Source reference: p. 4–5The request for permission to resign was not expressly granted or decided.
Source reference: p. 2No costs were ordered, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Source reference: p. 4–5Original Court PDF
J. Jenith KiranvsThe Registrar of Co-operativ
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
