Orissa High Court dismisses petition against CCCB appointments

Pradeep Kumar Malla and four others filed the petition questioning the legality of CCCB appointing seven employees of Cuttack Urban Cooperative Bank on deputation as assistant manager in 2020.
Representative Image
Representative Image File Image
Updated on
2 min read

CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has dismissed as “not maintainable” a petition seeking intervention in the service matters of Cuttack Central Cooperative Bank (CCCB).

The single judge bench of Justice S K Panigrahi said the petition is not maintainable as service matters of CCCB do not fall within the high court’s jurisdiction as the state does not exercise any functional control over bank’s affairs. Pradeep Kumar Malla and four others filed the petition questioning the legality of CCCB appointing seven employees of Cuttack Urban Cooperative Bank on deputation as assistant manager in 2020 and then absorbing them in the cadre of manager after six months.

Justice Panigrahi said: “In the present case, the lack of State control over the management of the CCCB significantly influences the conclusion that the bank does not fall within the definition of a public authority. The deputation of employees from another bank and their subsequent absorption by the CCCB does not imply that it has undertaken a public function.”

“Though the state may promote such entities (Cooperative Banks) as part of its social policy or economic development initiatives, this encouragement does not equate to the performance of a “public function”, Justice Panigrahi added in the judgment officially released on August 14.

“The CCCB operates under democratic control, and the ultimate authority regarding the service conditions of its employees lies with the management of the bank. Therefore, in this petition, the CCCB does not qualify as a “state” or “instrumentality of the state” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and is thus not subject to the jurisdiction of the high court under Article 226,” Justice Panigrahi further ruled. The judge said for any “other authority” to fall within the domain of the high court’s jurisdiction it should be discharging a “public duty” and the dispute between the parties shall persist regarding the non-performing of such public duty or function.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com