R. A. SHARMA, J. ( 1 ) IN 1970 petitioner was appointed as Credit Supervisor, district Co-operative Bank, Jhansi, Up to 1976 he claims to have done the work of Co-operative Societies also After the Government, in exercise of its power under Section 122-A of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has created centralised service of secretaries of the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies and framed rules known as the U. P. Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit societies Centralised Service Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules)for regulating the conditions of service of the members of the centralised service, petitoner was provisionally absorbed in the centralised service. He claims have been absorbed finally in 1976 after he was selected by the secreening Committee constituted under Section 122-A of the Act read with rules 20 and 21. He continued to work thereafter as Secretary in various co-operative Societies, The Secretary, District Administrative Committee issued a notice, dated 24-12-1982 containing allegations of misappopriation of fertiliser to the petitioner. By that notice he was called upon to show cause within three days from the date of its receipt, falling which it shall be presumed that he accepts the allegations contained therein, entitling the committee to take stern action against him This notice was served on the petitioner on 3-1-1983. He filed his reply, dated 5-1-1983, denying the charge of misappropriation and further raising serious allegitions of mala fide against Sri K. P Agarwal, the then Secretary of the District Administrative committee. By letter, dated 5-1-1983 issued by the Secretary of the District administrative Committee, petitioners service was terminated with immediate effect by offering one months salery in lieu of notice. Being aggrieved by it petitioner has filed this writ petition. ( 2 ) THE respondent have filed counter-affidavit and the petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit in reply thereto. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Being aggrieved by it petitioner has filed this writ petition. ( 2 ) THE respondent have filed counter-affidavit and the petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit in reply thereto. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions in support of the writ petition : (i) service of the petitioner, who was a permanent regular Secretary belonging to the Centralised Service, could have been terminated by one months notice or pay in lieu thereof : (ii) order of termination of service is absolutely arbitrary and has been passed without applying the mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and without taking into consideration the reply of the petitioner filed by him in response to the show-cause notice, (iit) the impugned order has been passed at the instance of Sri K P. Agarwal, the then Secretary of the Distict Administrative committee, who was motivated and was having strained relation with the petitioner : (iv) service of the petitioner could not have been terminated without regular departmental inquiry : (v) in the absence of inquiry from the concerned Co-operative Society regarding the alleged misappropriation of fertiliser, or action could have been taken against the petitioner : (vi)termination of service is a device employed by the respondents in order to deprive the petitioner of arrears of salary regarding which the Deputy registrar has written a letter : and (vii) District Administrative Committee had no jurisdiction to terminate the service of the petitioner, Sri M. S. Negi, learned Counsel for the resdondents has disputed the above contentions. ( 4 ) IT is not necessary to deal with all the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner : as this writ petition is liable to be allowed on the basis of first two submissions only. ( 4 ) IT is not necessary to deal with all the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner : as this writ petition is liable to be allowed on the basis of first two submissions only. ( 5 ) SUB-SECTION (1) of Section 122-A of the Act empowers the State government to provide by rules for creation of one or more services of such employees of such Co-operative Societies or class of Co-operative as the state Government may think fit, common to such Co-operative Societies and prescribed the method of recruitment, appointment, removal from service and other conditions of service of persons belonging to such service, sub-section (2) of the said section has laid down after such a service is created all employee of such socieies existing on the date of creation of such service stand provisionally absorbed in such service with effect from the date of its creation. Sub-section (3) of the same section has provided for final absorption of the provisionally absorbed employees, if they are found suitable after screeaing. This sub-section further provides that services of those employees, who are not found suitable for final absorption by the Secreening Committee, shall stand determined with effect from the date of issue of orders in that behalf by the Prescribed Authority. In this connection Rules 20 and 21 being relevant are reproduced below :"20. The existing employee of the societies at the commencement of these Rules shall be deemed to be provision all absorbed in the Centralised Service ; provided that the employees provisionally absorbed shall continue to draw their salaries and other allowances in their respective old scales from the Societies concerned. 21. The existing employees of the societies takan provisionally on the strength of the Centralised Service shall be finally absorbed in the said service after their screening arranged in accordance with the instructions issued by the Registrar, Co-operative societies,"it has been stated in Paragraph 4, 5 and 26 (a) of the writ petition that the petitioner appeared before the Screening Committee in March, 1976 and was selected by it and was finally abscribed in the Centralised Service. Paragraphs 4, 5 and 26 (at of the writ petition are reproduced below :"4, That on centralisation of the post of Secretary of Co operative credit Societies made in 1976 the petitioner was asked to present himself for screening according to the provisions of the newly amended Section 122-A of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, which he did in March, 1976. 5. The thereafter the petitioner was selected in the centralised service for Secretaries of Co-operative Agricultural Credit Societies and was posted from March, 1976 as the secretary in M/s. Babina chhavni Sadhan Sahkari Samiti wherein be worked up to 14th january, 1978. 26. (a) As the petitioner was holding the post of Secretary Co-operative societies, earlier than the formation of the Centralised service itself and having been legally absorbed in such a service, the authorities under centralised service rules have no jurisdiction to terminate his service. "it has further been stated in Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the writ petition by the petitioner that after his absorption he continued to work as Secretary and in 1978 he was sent to Training College for training For this purpose an agreement was executed between the State Cadre Authority and the petitioner in which it was mentioned that after completing the training petitioner will serve on the post included in the centralised service as per Rule 3 for a period not less than three years and if he fails to do so he will refund to ooverement/authority the whole of the cost of the training as may be determined by the Principal of the Co-operative Training Centre. Petitioner completed the training successfully. Thereafter he was transferred from district Jhansi to district Jalaun and has worked there as Secretary of the centralised service upto the time of termination of his service. ( 6 ) ALTHOUGH the respondents have filed the counter-affidavit but they have not denied the allegations contained in the aforesaid paragraphs of the writ petition In paragraph 14 of the counter-affidavit it has, however, been submitted by them "that the petitioner was a temporary employee and no confirmation order was issued in respect of the service of the petitioner. " such a plea cannot be accepted. All employees of the concerned societies existing on the date of creation of the centralised service stand "taken provisionally on the strength of centralised service. " Rule 21 makes their final absorption. " such a plea cannot be accepted. All employees of the concerned societies existing on the date of creation of the centralised service stand "taken provisionally on the strength of centralised service. " Rule 21 makes their final absorption. If found suitable after screening mandatory. Neither section 122-A nor Rule 21 contemplate an order of confirmation of service of those, who were selected after screening for final absorption in the centratired service. It is only in the case of those persons, who are not found suitable after screening for final absorption that the order is required to be issued by the Prescribed Authority from the date of which their service stand determined. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be treated to be a temporary employee on the ground that no confirmation order was issued in respect of his service. That apart, as the respondents have not denied the selection of the petitioner by the Screening Committee and his final absorption, in the centralised service, it is not open to them to say that the petitioner is a temporary secretary. The aforesaid averments in the counter-affidavit, therefore, cannot be accepted. Termination of the service of the petitioner, who is not a temporary employee, by offering one months notice or pay in lieu thereof under Regulation 25 (a) of U. P. Primary Agricultural Co-operative credit Societies (Centralised Service/ Regulations, 1968, was, therefore, not justified, because under the said Regulation service of only a temporary employee can be terminated by giving one months notice or pay in lieu thereof. ( 7 ) IN this connection an other aspect of the case relating to the transfer of the petitioner from district Jhansi to district Talaun and the consequences arising therefrom may also be meationed, because learned counsel for both the parties have used it in support of their submissions. In pursuance of the order of his Transfer, dated 3-1-1978 from district jbansi to district Jalaun, he was relieved from Jhansi on 25-7-1978 aod joined district Jalaun on 1-8-1978, Transfer order, relieving and joining reports cf the petitioner have b en filed as annexuees to the counter-affidavit. In pursuance of the order of his Transfer, dated 3-1-1978 from district jbansi to district Jalaun, he was relieved from Jhansi on 25-7-1978 aod joined district Jalaun on 1-8-1978, Transfer order, relieving and joining reports cf the petitioner have b en filed as annexuees to the counter-affidavit. Although the law did not specifically provide for transfer of a Secretary from one district to another ; but such transfers used to be made from time to time with the approval of the District Administrative Committees of both the districts Later on State Cadre Authority has also issued an order, dated 17-8-1978, sanctioning inter-district transfer of such Secretaries with the approval of the District Administrative Committees of both the districts subject to condition that the Secretary so transferred shall be deemed to have been newly appointed in the district to which he is transferred. The contention or the learned Counsel for the respondents is that the petitioner after his transfer cannot taken advantage of his final absorption in the centralised service, because he will be treated to have been newly appointed in district of Jalaun to which he was transferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner has. however, disputed the above contentions, submission of the learned Counsel for the respondents cannot be accepted for the following reasons, (i) there is no order appointing the petitioner afresh in district Jalaun. He joined that district in pursuance of an order of transfer passed by the Deputy Registrar in which it has been mentioned that he is being transferred under special circumstances. Neither the order of his transfer not the reports relieving him from Jhansi and joining at Jalaun indicate the fresh appointment ; (ii) petitioner was never informed that after his transfer he will bs treated as a new appointee. Such a condition was neither mentioned in the order of transfer nor was it communicated to him; (iii) even if the petitioner is treated as a new appointee in district jalaun, he cannot be deprived of his final absorption in the centralised service. There is no such order taking away the benefit of the final obsorption from him ; and (iv) petitioner was transferred from district Jhansi to district jalaun by order, dated 3-1-1978 but this order could not be implemented because of his training for a period of six months regarding which he has executed an agreement. There is no such order taking away the benefit of the final obsorption from him ; and (iv) petitioner was transferred from district Jhansi to district jalaun by order, dated 3-1-1978 but this order could not be implemented because of his training for a period of six months regarding which he has executed an agreement. He was, therefore, relieved from Jhansi in pursuance of the order of his transfer on 25-7-1978 and joined at Jalaun on 1-8-1978. The aforesaid order dated 17-8-1978 of the State Cadre Authority was passed after the petitioner has been transferred and joined at Jalaun in pursuance thereof. The said order of the State Cadre Authority, therefore, cannot be used against him. In the absence of applicability of the said order of the State Cadre Authority unless the petitioner is appointed afresh by a separate order in district Jalaun to which he was transferred and or has been informed of the consequence of the transfer, he cannot be said to be newly appointed Secretary in that district. There is no such order. There is also no order depriving him of the benefit of final absorption in the centralised service. ( 8 ) THE second submission is also liable to be accepted. Secretary, district Administrative Committee gave a notice dated 24-12-1982 containing serious allegations of misappropriation of fertiliser to the petitioner. This show-cause notice was received by the petitioner on 3-1-1983. He submitted his reply on 5-1-1983 But the District Administrative Committee has passed the order, removing the petitioner from service even before petitioners reply could reach it. It this connection in paragrap 26 (d) of the writ petition, it has been stared by the petitioner that no proper show-cause notice was given to him "and the authorities decided even before the petitioners reply had reached them". Theae alllegations have not been denied in the counter-affidavit. Therefore, it has to be accepted that the District administrative Committee passed order, terminating the service of the petitioner without considering his reply. The sequence of event, such as the service of the show-cause notice dated 24-12-1882 on the petitioner on 3-1-1983, giving him three days time only for filing reply holding of the meeting of the District Administrative committee on 5-1-1983 and passing the resolution terminating the service of the petitioner before his reply could reach them, clearly demonstrates that action of the respondents was hasty and arbitrary. Removing a person from service without considering his reply, which is submitted in response to the show-cause notice is an arbitrary action. It amounts to condemning a person on certain charges without taking into consideration his version, such an order has to be declered as unfair, unreasonable and arbitrary. ( 9 ) THE District Administrative Committee is a statutory authority created by the Rules and it exercises the statutory powers while terminating the service of a Secretary of the centralised service. The power to terminate the service of a member of the centralised service like every other power has to be exercised by the concerned authorities fairly and reasonable. That is a mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India binding on all person, who are exercising the statutory powers. In this connection reference may be made to Manager D. B. Belliappn, AIR 1979 SC 429 , wherein Supreme court has laid down that the principles contained in Article 14 the Constitution are available even to a temporary Government servant, if his service has been atbitorily terminated. Reference may also be made to Shankar Das v. Union of India, AIR 1985 SC 772 , wherein while dealing with a case of imposition of penalty under clause (a) of the second proviso to Article 33 (2) of the Constitution. Honble Supreme Court has laid down that "that power like every other power has to be exercised fairly, justly, and reasonably,"and the concerned authority cannot pass an order in a huff without applying its mind to the relevant consideration. The rule that the power has to be exercised in a manner which is just, fair and reasonable and not in an unreasonable or arbitrary manner has also been highlighted by the Honble supreme Court in D. T. C v. D. T C. Mazdoor Congress, AIR 1991 SC 101 . The aforesaid principles ate equally applicable when service of a Secretary belonging to the centralised service is terminated by the District Administrative committee. " ( 10 ) FOR the reasons given above, this writ petition is liable to be allowed. The aforesaid principles ate equally applicable when service of a Secretary belonging to the centralised service is terminated by the District Administrative committee. " ( 10 ) FOR the reasons given above, this writ petition is liable to be allowed. After the order of termination of service of an employee is set aside by a court, he is entitled to be reinstated with full back wages unless he was gainfully employed elsewhere daring the period after the termination of his service and before his reinstatement, la the instant case there is noting on the record to show that the petitioner was employed elsewhere after the termination of his service. He is, therefore, entitled to be reinstated with full back salary. ( 11 ) THIS writ petition it accordingly allowed with costs. Resolution dated 5-l-l983 passed by the District Administrative Committee and the order dated 5-1-1983, passed by the Secretary, District Administrative committee. Jalaun are quashed. Respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner forthwith with full salary and other consequential benefits for the period during which he was prevented from disharging his duties as Secretary due to the impugned order till the date of his reinstatement. Petition allowed. .