Judgment :- K.Bhaskaran, learned Additional Government pleader, takes notices on behalf of the respondents. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Government pleader, appearing for the respondents. By consent of both counsel, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the third respondent in his proceedings dated 28.6.2006. 4. Thecase of the petitioner is that the third respondent has passed the impugned order dated 28.6.2006. in and by which, suspending the petitioner, who is a sales man of the fair price shop with effect from 28.6.2006, for a period of three months, prima facie on the charge of soma irregularities in the fair price shop. 5. Theimpugned order passed by the third respondent is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that it is not in conformity with Section 76(1)(a) and (1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. A perusal of the impugned order even though, shows that he is prima facie satisfied that there are some irregularities and mentioning the period of suspension, the words i.e., ‘in the interest of the Society or in the public interest’ do not find place. 6. In view of the said circumstances, the petitioner would rely upon a similar order passed by this Court dated 9.12.2002, passed in W.P. No. 43265 of 2002, wherein, this Court, while setting aside the order of the respondent to proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law. 7. The learned Additional Government Pleader, would fairly submit that the words, ‘interests of the Society or the public interest’ are not available in the impugned order, and therefore, the impugned order passed by the third respondent may be set aside, by giving liberty to the respondent to proceed against the petitioner and pass fresh orders. 8. In view of the submissions made and also the earlier order passed by this Court, the Writ Petition stands allowed and the impugned order passed by the third respondents is set aside, giving liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law, if they advised to do so, without being influences by the present order passed by the third respondent, which is set aside. 9. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected M.P. is closed. No costs.