JUDGMENT
Deepak Gupta, J.
1. This case reflects a very shocking state of affairs, where the concerned officer appears to have even interpolated the order sheets after the order was announced.
The facts of the case are:
2. A revision petition under Section 94 of the H.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1968 was filed by one Sh. Vishal Bansal before the Additional Secretary (Co-operative Societies) exercising the powers of the State Government. This petition was numbered as Revision No. 62 of 2006. Arguments in the case were heard by Sh. S.S. Guleria, the then Additional Secretary (Co-operative Societies) on 18th December, 2006. It is also not disputed before us that the order was reserved on the said date. The copy of the order was sent to the petitioner along with a covering letter signed by the Superintendent, Co-operation Section, Himachal Pradesh, in which it was stated that copy of the order passed on 1-3-2007 was enclosed. The copy of the order also bears the same date.
3. The present petition has been filed challenging the said order of the Additional Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. One of the grounds taken in the petition is that Sh. S.S. Guleria, Additional Secretary (Co-operation), who heard the arguments on 18th December, 2006 ceased to hold this office w.e.f. 22.2.2007 and had become functus officio on 1st March, 2007 when the order was announced.
4. When this case first came up before us on 8.5.2007 we had passed a detailed order, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:
One of the contentions raised in the writ petition is that on 1.3.2007 when the impugned order was passed, Sh. S.S. Guleria was not holding the charge of the post of Additional Secretary (Co-operation) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh. Before going into the merits of the case, we feel, it will be proper for the State Government to file an affidavit on or before the next date as to whether on 1.3.2007 Sh. S.S. Guleria was holding the post of Additional Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh or not. Affidavit in this behalf be filed by the Principal Secretary (Personnel) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh within one week. List on 16.5.2007.
5. On 16.5.2007 an affidavit was filed by the State in which it is clearly stated that Sh. S.S. Guleria, was not holding the charge of the post of Additional Secretary (Co-operation) on 1st March, 2007 and had in fact been relieved from the said post on 22nd February, 2007.
6. We had thereafter called for records of the case. We have seen the original order which is signed by Sh. S.S. Guleria and it bears the date “1-3-2007”. This date appears to be in the hand of Sh. S.S. Guleria, himself. It would, however, be pertinent to quote the zimni orders of 18.12.2006 and 19.2.2007, which read as follows:
18.12.2006 Sh. Trilok Chauhan Advocate for appellant present. Sh. Rakesh Jamwal Advocate for respondent present. Arguments put forth by both the Counsels heard. Judgment reserved.
Sd/
Addl. Secy. (Co-op.) to the Govt, of H.P.
19.2.2007: Case called. Sh.Trilok Chauhan, Advocate for petitioner and Sh. Rakesh Jamwal Advocate for respondent not present. Judgment reserved on 18.12.2006 is released today.
Announced.
Sd/
Addl. Secy. (Co-op.) to the Government of H.P.
7. First of all we express our dismay about the manner in which the Additional Secretary (Co-operation) pronounced the order in the absence of the parties. Even if an order is reserved, it would be appropriate for every Judicial or quasi-judicial authority to pronounce the order in the presence of the parties on a particular date. If necessary, notice should be issued to the parties or their Counsel informing them of the date fixed for pronouncement of judgment.
8. To us it appears that the noting dated 19.2.2007 has been interpolated later on. In case the order was announced on 19.2.2007 there was no reason why the original order should bear the date 1-3-2007. It would have been in the natural course of events if both the noting and the order bore the same date. It appears to us that the zimni order dated 19.2.2007 has clearly been incorporated at a later stage probably after filing of the present writ petition. We deprecate this practice and we make it clear that if in future any such instance comes to our notice, we shall take stern action in the matter. It is apparent that Sh. S.S. Guleria, was not holding the office of Additional Secretary (Co-operation) on 1.3.2007 the date when the order was signed. The order was admittedly not pronounced in the presence of the parties or their Counsel. On 1.3.2007 Sh. S.S. Guleria had become functus officio and he had no power or right to pronounce the order. This order is wholly without jurisdiction and is accordingly set aside.
9. We are aware that the dispute between the parties is a long standing one and they have been litigating for long. Respondent No. 4 claims that his truck should be engaged by the petitioner-Society.
10. Keeping in view the nature of the dispute, we direct that the parties shall appear before the Additional/Joint Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh on 1st June, 2007, whichever officer is now exercising powers of the State Government under Section 94 of the H.P. Co-operative Societies Act. On the said date, the said officer shall fix a date for hearing of the case in the month of June, 2007 itself. He shall make an endeavour to dispose of this case latest by 15th July, 2007.
11. Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate, contends that one Sh. Baldev Kumar is a necessary party to the petition. We are not going into the merits of the this allegation. In case the petitioner wants to pursue this contention he may move an appropriate application before the Additional/ Joint Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh on 1st June, 2007 itself. In case the concerned officer is not available on 1st June, 2007 his Secretary shall fix a date within next week for appearance of the parties. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
CMP No. 1028 of 2007.
This application does not survive in view of the order passed in the main writ petition. Interim order dated 8th May, 2007 stands vacated. The application is disposed of.
A copy of this judgment be sent to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, for appropriate action. He shall ensure that necessary instructions are issued to all the administrative officers, exercising judicial or quasi-judicial powers that they should comply with the observations made in this judgment.
Copy dasti on usual charges.