JUDGMENT Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. On an oral prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, let respondent No.5 be correctly described as Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Suratganj, Barabanki through its Chairman. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dated 17.12.2016 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki is based on complete misreading and misconstruction of the order passed by this Court on 22.02.2012 in Writ Petition No. 12526 (SS) of 1990 which was filed earlier by the petitioner challenging the order terminating his services passed on 20.11.1990 by the Chairman of respondent No.5 and hence the order suffers from complete lack of application of mind by the authority who has passed it. From the pleadings on record, it appears that petitioner was initially appointed on 16.11.1989 under the order of District Assistant Registrar, Barabanki (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) on the post of accounts clerk/sales man (Aankik/Vikreta) in the Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited, Brahmi Tola, Barabanki which was a member of District Cooperative Bank Limited, Barabanki, the District Level Cooperative Society. By means of order dated 13.01.1989 the petitioner was authorized to work as Secretary of Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Suratganj, Barabanki, however, by means of order dated 20.11.1990, passed by the Chairman of the Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, the petitioner's services were terminated. The said order terminating the services of the petitioner became the subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No. 12526(SS) of 1990 wherein an interim order dated 18.12.1990 was passed by this Court staying the operation of the order terminating the services of the petitioner. In the meantime, during pendency of the writ petition, the Board of Directors, Sadhan Sahkari Simiti Limited in its resolution dated 21.12.2010 resolved to withdraw the order terminating the services of the petitioner, namely, order dated 20.11.1990, as a consequence of which, the writ petition filed by the petitioner, namely, Writ Petition No. 12526 (SS) of 1990 has been dismissed as infructuous by means of order dated 22.02.2012. As a result of order dated 22.02.2012, passed by this Court the petitioner continues to serve the Cooperative Society, however, the said order passed by the Court appears to have been completely misunderstood by the Assistant Registrar, Barabanki for the reason that the impugned order recites that on dismissal of the writ petition by this Court by means of order dated 22.02.2012, the services of the petitioner stand terminated. The said interpretation of the Court's order dated 22.02.2012 is absolutely absurd for the reason that the writ petition filed by the petitioner against the order terminating his services dated 20.11.1990 was dismissed by this court as having become infructuous for the reason that the order dated 20.11.1990 itself was withdrawn by the Cooperative Society. As the interpretation does not appear to be reasonable and sound, to that extent the impugned order cannot be said to be sustainable. The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki has given the charge of the post of Secretary to one Sri Udai Bhan Singh who his working as cadre of Secretary in Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Baraiya. The impugned order is based on another order passed by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative, U.P. which finds mentioned in the impugned order dated 17.12.2016. The order passed by the Assistant Registrar also makes a mention about certain irregularities said to have been committed by the petitioner. However, since the very premise on which the impugned order dated 17.12.2016 has been passed, has been completely misread and misunderstood by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki, I find it appropriate to require the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki to revisit the entire matter and take a decision afresh correctly interpreting the context in which the order dismissing the writ petition as having become infructuous was passed by this Court on 22.02.2012. The petitioner has continued since long on the strength of the interim order passed by this Court and finally since the Board of Directors of the Societies by its resolution dated 21.12.2010 has revoked the termination order dated 20.11.1990, there appears no occasion as to why the petitioner should not be treated to be an employee of the Cooperative Society concerned. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.12.2016, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki, as is contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, is quashed. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.12.2016, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki, as is contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, is quashed. The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Barabanki is directed to revisit the entire matter and take a fresh decision in the light of the observations made herein above and also taking into consideration the extant law, rules and circulars etc. It will be open to the Assistant Registrar to call for reports or any other document or material from the authorities concerned to arrive at a correct conclusion while taking decision under this order. Decision under this order shall be taken by the Assistant Registrar within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. There will be no order as to costs.