JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging validity of suspension order dated 13.01.2014 (Annex.3) passed by the Registrar, Co-operative societies, Jaipur while exercising the power under Rule 39(4) of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 [hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 2003']. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Rule 39(4) of the Rules of 2003, the Registrar cannot pass an order to place the employee of the society under suspension but order impugned has been passed by the Registrar. The petitioner who is working on the post of Acting Manager. The Registrar is having power to direct the committee of the society to place any employee under suspension but here in this case the Registrar himself has exercised power under rule 39(4) of the Government Servant Rules, 1996. The application of petitioner was considered but rejected on the ground that though petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment on compassionate ground under the Rules of 1996 but he is having more than two children, therefore, in view of notification dated 29.10.2005, not eligible for appointment on the post in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Rules of 1996 were promulgated by the welfare State for welfare of the family of deceased employee and those rules have overriding effect over other service rules, therefore, purposely, in the notification dated 29.10.2005, Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 were not included in the list meaning the said amendment made in various service rules vide notification dated 29.10.2005 for denial of appointment in the event of having more than two children after 01.06.2002 is not applicable. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to provide bread and butter to the family of deceased employee but here in this case, un-necessary hurdle is being created by the respondent department to deny appointment, therefore, communication dated 18.07.2014 may be quashed and respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of petitioner for providing appointment on compassionate ground ignoring the notification dated 29.10.2005 whereby, an amendment was made to deny appointment to candidates having more than two children born Rules of 2003 and placed the petitioner under suspension, therefore, the order impugned is without jurisdiction. 4. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that in reply, respondents have stated that as per Rule 39(7), there is power left with the Registrar to make an order for placing any employee of society under suspension but that power can be exercised if the direction issued by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies is not complied with by the Society, therefore, the order impugned is totally without authority of law, therefore, the order impugned may be quashed. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that there is power left with the Registrar to place any employee under suspension under Rule 39(7), if society is not making compliance of direction issued by the Registrar, as such, it cannot be said that there is no jurisdiction to pass such order, therefore, obviously suspension order can be issued by the Registrar while exercising power under Rule 39(7) of the Rules of 2003, therefore, this writ petition may be dismissed. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused Rule 39 of the Rules of 2003 which reads as under:- "Rule 39(1) of the Rules of 2003 reads as under:- "39. Officers and employees of co- operative societies .- (1)Notwithstanding anything contained in the bye-laws of any society, no co-operative society shall appoint any person as its paid officer or employee in any category of service, unless he possesses the qualifications and furnishes the security, if so specified by the Registrar from time to time, for such category of service in the society, or for the class of society to which it belongs. The conditions of service including discipline and control of the employees of the societies shall be such as specified by the Registrar. (2)No co-operative society shall retain in service any paid or employees, if he does not acquire the qualifications or furnish the security as is referred to in sub-rule (1) within such time as the Registrar may direct. (3)The Registrar may for special reasons, relax in respect of any paid officer or employee, the provisions of this rule in regard to the qualifications he should possess or the security he should furnish. (3)The Registrar may for special reasons, relax in respect of any paid officer or employee, the provisions of this rule in regard to the qualifications he should possess or the security he should furnish. (4)Where it comes to the notice of the Registrar that a paid officer or servant of a society has committed or has been otherwise responsible for misappropriation, breach of trust or other offence, in relation to the society, the Registrar may, if in his opinion, there is prima facie evidence against such paid officer or servant and the suspension of such paid officer or servant is necessary in the interest of the society direct the committee of the society pending the investigation and disposal of the matter, to place or clause to be placed such paid officer or servant under suspension from such date and for such period as may be specified by him. (5)On receipt of a direction from the Registrar under sub-rule (4), the committee of the society shall, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in the bye-laws, place or cause to be placed the paid officer or servant under suspension forthwith. (6)The Registrar may direct the committee to extend from time to time the period of suspension and the paid officer or servant so suspended shall not be reinstated except with the previous sanction of the Registrar, whose decision shall be final. (7)If the committee fails to comply with the direction issued under sub-rule (4), the Registrar may make an order placing such paid officer or servant under suspension from such date and for such period, as he may specify in the order and thereupon the paid officer or servant, as the case may be, shall be under suspension. (8)Immediately after placing the employee under suspension under sub-rule (4) or (7) as the case may be, the society shall initiate disciplinary action against the suspended employee under the prevalent service/disciplinary rules applicable on the employee." 7. Upon perusal of the aforesaid Sub rule (4), it is abundantly clear that Registrar himself cannot exercise power straightaway to place any employee of the society under suspension. He is required to direct the committee of the society to place any employee under suspension, if any misconduct is committed by him. Upon perusal of the aforesaid Sub rule (4), it is abundantly clear that Registrar himself cannot exercise power straightaway to place any employee of the society under suspension. He is required to direct the committee of the society to place any employee under suspension, if any misconduct is committed by him. It is also true that there is power left with the Registrar under Rule 39(7) to pass the suspension order but that power can be exercised in the event of non-compliance of the direction issued by the Registrar by the committee of the society. Herein this case, there is no whisper in the reply that any direction was issued by the Registrar to the society for placing the petitioner under suspension for any misconduct to the society, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the order of suspension is totally without jurisdiction. 8. In view of above facts and provisions, this writ petition is allowed and order (Annex.3) dated 13.01.2014 is hereby quashed and set aside with liberty to the Registrar to exercise its power afresh for placing the petitioner under suspension strictly in accordance with Rules of 2003.Petition allowed. *******