Milk Union Employee Cannot Be Denied Assistance of Retired Government Employee as Defence Assistant in Departmental Inquiry Merely Because He Is Not a Government Servant: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Name: Rajinder Singh v. Registrar Cooperative Societies, Punjab & Others

Date of Judgment: 30 October 2026

Citation: CWP-21007-2023

Bench: Justice Namit Kumar

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that an employee of a Cooperative Milk Producers Union cannot be denied the assistance of a serving or retired Punjab Government employee as a Defence Assistant in departmental proceedings merely because he is not a Government servant.

The Court observed that Rule 33.4 of the Cooperative Milk Producers Union Employees Service (Non-Common Cadre) Rules, 1996, expressly incorporates the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970, in matters concerning discipline, punishment and appeal. Consequently, the procedural safeguard provided under Rule 8(8) of the 1970 Rules extends to employees governed by the 1996 Rules. Denial of such assistance solely on the ground of their non-government employment status would defeat the purpose of incorporating these rules and undermine the principles of natural justice.

Summary: The petitioner, initially appointed as a Dairy Helper-cum-Cleaner and subsequently posted as In-charge of a Milk Chilling Centre, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings following a charge-sheet issued on 3 May 2023. During the inquiry, he sought permission to engage a retired Punjab Government employee as his Defence Assistant under Rule 8(8) of the 1970 Rules. His request was rejected by the Inquiry Officer, and the rejection was upheld in appeal on the ground that employees of the Milk Union were not Government servants.

The High Court observed that Rule 33.4 of the 1996 Rules makes the 1970 Rules applicable to Milk Union employees without expressly excluding the procedural safeguard relating to Defence Assistants. The Court further noted that the governing rules themselves permit the appointment of retired Government Officers as Inquiry Officers.

Emphasising procedural fairness, particularly for Class-IV and lower-grade employees who may lack familiarity with disciplinary procedures, the Court held that an employee cannot be deprived of reasonable assistance in defending disciplinary charges merely because of his employment status.

Decision: The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders dated 28 August 2023 and 4 September 2023 rejecting the petitioner’s request. The petitioner was permitted to engage a serving or retired Punjab Government employee as his Defence Assistant, subject to compliance with the conditions prescribed under the 1970 Rules. The Inquiry Officer was directed to resume the disciplinary proceedings from the stage at which the request had been declined.