Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 250 (ALL)

Kishan Chand, Ramdev Suspended Cadre Secretary Kisan Seva Sahkari Samiti v. State of U. P.

2006-01-25

RAKESH TIWARI

body2006
RAKESH TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner was appointed as Cadre secretary by direct recruitment on 15. 2. 1977. While working as Cadre Secretary in Kisan Seva sahkari Samiti Ltd. the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 28. 12. 2005 by respondent No. 3, Member Secretary, District Administrative Committee and Secretary/general manager, District Co-operative Bank Ltd. , Muzaffarnagar. This petition has been filed with the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record of the case and to quash the suspension order dated 28. 12. 2005 passed by respondent No. 3 contained in annexure-1 to the writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere with the functioning of the petitioner as Secretary in pursuance of the aforesaid suspension order dated 28. 12. 2005. (iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Court may deem fit and consider proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. ( 2 ) THE contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the order of suspension is illegal and without jurisdiction being contrary to the Service Regulations and the Rules framed under the u. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. It is submitted that the impugned order of suspension is vitiated having been passed on the dictates of the District Assistant Registrar who is no more member/secretary of the society by virtue of the 12th amendment to the Service Rules, 2004. It is next submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order of suspension has been passed without application of mind to the relevant records and also without appreciating the contents of letter dated 23. 12. 2005 sent by the Branch Manager, Muzaffarnagar, District co-operative Bank having its branch at Mansoorpur to the Member Secretary, District administrative Committee and Secretary/general Manager, District Cooperative Bank Ltd. , muzaffarngar, respondent No. 3. The counsel for the petitioner also submits that the letter dated 23. 12. 2005 also falsify the allegation of the shortage of stock of the fertilizers in the Samiti to the tune of Rs. 6,66,064/- and other financial irregularities claimed to be found by the Inspecting officers which was the sole basis of order dated 28. 12. 2005. The counsel for the petitioner also submits that the letter dated 23. 12. 2005 also falsify the allegation of the shortage of stock of the fertilizers in the Samiti to the tune of Rs. 6,66,064/- and other financial irregularities claimed to be found by the Inspecting officers which was the sole basis of order dated 28. 12. 2005. ( 3 ) IT is urged by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation on 4. 1. 2006 for recalling the suspension order dated 28. 12. 2005 annexing all relevant documents in support of his case and pleading his innocence but no action has been taken by the respondents on his representation even though it is amply clear from his representation as well as letter dated 23. 12. 2005 aforesaid that no financial irregularity has ever been committed by the petitioner. Copy of the letter dated 23. 12. 2005;copy of the bank receipt along with loan recovery and the copy of the, representation of the petitioner dated 4. 1. 2006 have also been appended as Annexure nos. 2 to 4 to the writ petition. ( 4 ) SRI H. R. Mishra, counsel for the respondents submits that Member/secretary had jurisdiction under Rule 14 (v) of the U. P. Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies Centralized service Rules, 1976 to suspend a member of the Centralized Service with the prior concurrence of Assistant Registrar Rule 14 (v) is as under: 14. Powers and duties of the Member Secretary of the District Committee: -Subject to the control and supervision of the Chairman of the District Committee the Member Secretary of the district Committee shall (i ). . . (ii ). . . (iii ). . . (iv ). . . (v) have power of suspending a member of the Centralized Service with the prior concurrence of. Assistant Registrar. ( 5 ) PERUSAL of the aforesaid rule quoted above shows that the Member/secretary has power to suspend a member of the Centralize service after obtaining prior concurrence of District assistant Registrar. Sri H. R. Mishra, counsel for the respondents has also urged that Rule 59 (2) (g) provides that the order of suspension may be revoked by the authority who has passed the suspension order or by the District Administrative Committee if there are sufficient reasons for revocation. Sri H. R. Mishra, counsel for the respondents has also urged that Rule 59 (2) (g) provides that the order of suspension may be revoked by the authority who has passed the suspension order or by the District Administrative Committee if there are sufficient reasons for revocation. It further provides that if the authority is of the view that there are sufficient reasons to revoke the same, the reasons thereof shall be recorded in the order of revocation. ( 6 ) IT is urged that from perusal of the record it appears that the Member/secretary has passed the impugned suspension order on the dictates of the District Assistant Registrar Co-operative societies U. P. Muzaffarnagar and not after obtaining his prior approval. ( 7 ) ON the aforesaid basis it is submitted that the petitioner has already Submitted a representation dated 4. 1. 2006 before the authority and the Court may issue direction to the authority concerned to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner within a time bound frame fixed by this court. ( 8 ) IN the circumstances, the petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the authority concerned to decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 4. 1. 2006 by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of submission of a certified copy of this order. ( 9 ) THE petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order before the authority concerned within a period of 15 days from today. . .