JUDGMENT : S. N. Prasad, J - This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the following prayers:- i) As to why the impugned order dtd.31.12.2014 of Opposite Party No.3 under Para 26-B of EPF Scheme, 1992 in respect of petitioner Bank in P.F. Code No.OR/835 under Annexure-7 shall not be quashed; and ii) And pass order declaring opposite party no.4 as employee of petitioner Bank with effect from 20.2.2003 as per the orders of Government of Odisha, Cooperation Department and opposite party no.2 under Annexure-2 and 3. 2. The brief fact of the case of the petitioner as per pleading made in the writ petition is that the petitioner is a Central Cooperative Society duly registered under the provisions of the Orissa Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 (in short "OCS Act") of the State of Odisha which has been created to manage by its own Committee of Management as per the power conferred U/s.28 of the OCS Act, however as per the mandates of section 123 of the Act, the State Government has the authority to interfere with the management and to issue necessary directions to the petitioner society for the larger interest of the State as well as the benefit of any class. As per the scheme OCS Act, all the cooperative societies have their independent identity having their own legal entity and one society of any class cannot interfere with the management of another society in any manner. The opposite party no.4 was appointed by his own employer in the year 1964, i.e. the management of Badapalasa Primary Cooperative Society which has got nothing to do with the present petitioner society. In the year 1980, the Registrar Cooperative Societies, Odisha, for safeguarding the interest of the State as well as for the purpose of facilitating the poor farmers to avail the benefits given by the State smoothly, had framed a scheme exercising his power under section 33 A of the OCS Act, 1962 which was known as Cadre Rules, 1980, as per the provision of the aforesaid Cadre Scheme, there was a Cadre Committee within the area of operation of each Central Cooperative Bank. The Cadre Committee was consisting of the Secretary of the concerned Central Bank, Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies of the concerned area and others as members. The Cadre Committee was consisting of the Secretary of the concerned Central Bank, Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies of the concerned area and others as members. The secretary / Chief Executive of the Central Cooperative Bank was also acting as Secretary of the Cadre Committee and all correspondences of such Cadre Committee were made under the signature of the Secretary. In the year 2003, the State Government had decided to abolish the Cadre Scheme from the State and issued directives to all the Central Cooperative Banks for absorption of Secretaries / Chief Executives of different primary service societies working under the control of the Cadre Committee as their employees. Accordingly a circular to that effect has been issued as per annexure-3. The opposite party no.4, in terms of the office order issued vide annexure-4, submitted his joining on 12.11.2003 as an employee of the petitioner-organization and worked there and ultimately superannuated from service on attaining the age of superannuation, i.e. at the age of 58 years. The opposite party no.4 lodged a complaint before the opposite party no.3 invoking the jurisdiction of para 26(B) of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme 1952, the opposite party No.3, after taking note of the offer of appointment in other society and in pursuance to the annexure-1, 2 and 3, has treated him as an employee of the petitioner and accordingly passed order under para 26 B of the scheme, 1952 reaching to the conclusion that he was an employee of the petitioner from the date of joining, i.e. 11.9.1964 and accordingly the Bank the petitioner herein, has been directed to enroll the opposite party no.4 from the date of joining of establishment excluding the period of eligibility as prescribed and prevailing during that time under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952 and the schemes framed thereunder, the aforesaid order is under challenge in this writ petition mainly on the ground that the petitioner has given his joining under the petitioner Cooperative Bank only w.e.f. 12.11.2003, as such treating him an employee of the petitioner since 11.9.1964 even though he was continuing in the other society, wrong finding has been given casting liability upon the petitioner cooperative society, hence the said order is absolutely illegal, as such not sustainable in the eye of law. 3. 3. This court, while hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at the first instance, has issued notice upon the opposite parties, in terms thereof notice has been issued upon the opposite party nos.3 and 4 which has been found to be validly served, in pursuance thereto, opposite party no.3 has appeared through Mr. Sishir Sundar Mohanty but opposite party no.4 has chosen not to appear. The opposite party no.3 has taken stand by putting reliance upon annexure-2 dtd.20th February, 2003 issued by the Cooperation Department, Government of Odisha whereby and where under decision has been taken by the State Government to constitute a Common Cadre of such key personnel and framed Rules for the purpose vide circular no.10827 dtd.13.3.1980 and subsequent circulars issued in this regard. The employee, after the Cadre Scheme having been introduced, has been treated to be deemed employees of the Central Cooperative Banks which shall stand categorized as Grade VI(A) employees of their parent Central Cooperative Banks are eligible for consideration/promotion against the vacant sanctioned posts in higher grades of their banks notwithstanding anything contained in any Staff Service Rules of the said bank concerned with a further decision that the aforesaid deemed employees of a District Central Cooperative Bank shall be eligible for mutual transfer to the other District Central Cooperative Bank subject to condition that the two employees concerned apply to the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies with their respective willingness for the purpose. The other order has been issued on 13.6.2003 as under Annexure3 which has been issued in exercise of power conferred under Section 33A of the OCS Act, 1962 taking decision therein regarding the Service Rules and Discipline and Appeal Rules of the employees of the aforesaid Cadre Committee. Annexure-4 has been issued on 3.11.2003 which has been issued in pursuance to the order of the Cooperation Department of the State of Odisha dtd.20th February, 2003 and 13.6.2003. Annexure-4 has been issued on 3.11.2003 which has been issued in pursuance to the order of the Cooperation Department of the State of Odisha dtd.20th February, 2003 and 13.6.2003. The Cadre Secretaries working under Common Cadre Scheme of the Bank are deemed to be employees of Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank, Keonjhar under Grade VI(A) of the Category of the service of the Bank and in view thereof when opposite party no.4 has joined his service under the petitioner, the past services rendered by him will be treated to be service rendered under the petitioner Cooperative Society and the authority, by putting reliance upon the aforesaid decision of the Government, has rightly taken decision treating the date of appointment of opposite party no.4 as 11.9.1964 and thereby passed the order giving declaration that he is eligible to be brought under the fold of the provision of EPF and MP Act, 1952, hence according to the learned counsel, there is no infirmity in the aforesaid order, as such the same may not be interfered with. He further submits that after the order having been passed by the authority under section 26-B, proceeding u/s.7A has been initiated in which the final order has been passed which has been appealed by the petitioner before the appellate forum in pursuance to the power provided under section 7(i) of the Act, 1952 wherein the petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order passed by the authority u/s.26-B, as such it is settled position of law that two simultaneous proceedings are not permissible, hence on this ground also the writ petition may be dismissed. 4. Countering this submission, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although he has prayed before the Tribunal assailing the order passed by the authority under para 26-B of the Scheme, 1952 but the same is not to be looked into by the Tribunal in exercise of power conferred u/s.7(i), hence this writ petition may be entertained and be adjudicated on merit. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and appreciated their rival submission. The fact which is not in dispute in this case is that opposite party no.4 is working in the Cooperative Society under the petitioner society at the time of joining in the service, i.e. on 11.9.1964 as an Asst. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and appreciated their rival submission. The fact which is not in dispute in this case is that opposite party no.4 is working in the Cooperative Society under the petitioner society at the time of joining in the service, i.e. on 11.9.1964 as an Asst. Supervisor and later on was transferred to different service / primary cooperative societies by the order of the bank authority and in pursuance to the decision taken by the Cooperation Department for constituting cadre committee. The opposite party no.4 in pursuance to the order passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha dtd.21.1.1996 by which a draft gradation list of 29 cadre secretaries has been issued, in which his name was there in the said gradation list and his date of joining was taken on record by the Bank as 11.9.1964 who continued as Secretary till 11.11.2003. The service of the petitioner, in pursuance to the order No.6903 dtd.13.6.2003 issued by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies along with subsequent resolution No.8 dtd.26.9.2003 of the Bank, he became an employee of the Bank after submitting joining report on 12.11.2003 as Grade VI(A) Secretary and was superannuated from service w.e.f. 30.11.2003 after attaining the age of 58 years. The petitioner made an application to decide the applicability of the provision of the Act, 1952 by making an application U/s.26-B of the Scheme 1952 and the competent authority, by taking into consideration the decision of the cooperation department of the State of Odisha of constituting common cadre committee and the date of joining of opposite party no.4 as Asst. Secretary in the petitioner Bank and in pursuance to the decision taken vide annexdure-4 dtd.3.11.2003, has treated him as an employee of Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Keonjhar, the petitioner herein and accordingly the order has been passed in his favour, which is under challenge in this writ petition. Secretary in the petitioner Bank and in pursuance to the decision taken vide annexdure-4 dtd.3.11.2003, has treated him as an employee of Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Keonjhar, the petitioner herein and accordingly the order has been passed in his favour, which is under challenge in this writ petition. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that he can only be treated to be an employee of the petitioner - bank with effect from the date of joining, i.e. 20.11.2003 and not from 1.11.1964 and the authorities has passed the order without appreciating this aspect of the matter but after going through the order passed by the competent authority which is impugned in this writ petition, this court is of the view that when the government has taken decision of creating common cadre committee which means that the entire cadre has been treated to be one cadre and moreover the opposite party no.4, at the first instance, has joined his duty on 11.9.1964 as Asst. Secretary in Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Keonjhar, the petitioner herein, but subsequently thereafter he has been transferred from one bank to another in pursuance to the decision taken by the government by constituting common cadre committee and ultimately he resumed his duty in the Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. w.e.f. 12.11.2003, as such not counting the past services rendered prior to 12.11.2003 only on the ground as has been raised by the petitioner that he has not rendered service in the petitioner Bank, as such the petitioner Bank is not liable to extend the relief of the EPF and MP Act, 1952 but this interpretation of the petitioner Bank is absolutely not sustainable in the eye of law for the reason that the opposite party no.4 has resumed his duty as Asst. Secretary under the petitioner - Bank and thereafter by virtue of the decision taken by the State of Odisha though Cooperation Department for constituting a common cadre committee, has been transferred from one Cooperative Bank to another Cooperative Bank and ultimately has given his joining with effect from 12.11.2003 as cadre secretary under the petitioner Bank since the petitioner has been subjected to the provision of constituting of the cadre committee, he cannot be deprived from the past services rendered which he has rendered on transfer to the other Cooperative Society Banks, moreover, the Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. has also issued a resolution by virtue of an order on 3.11.2003 to the effect that the cadre secretaries working under Common Cadre Scheme of the Bank are deemed to be an employee of Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. under Grade VI(A) of the category of the service of the Bank, in view thereof the opposite party no.4 cannot be deprived from such benefit otherwise the same would be contrary to the decision taken by the Bank on 3.11.2003 under Annexure-4, the relevant part of the order dtd.3.11.2003 is being quoted for ready reference:- "In pursuance to the Order issued vide Govt. of Orissa, Cooperation Department, Bhubaneswar in No.ICR-3/2000 (Pt) 3381/Coop: dt.20.2.2003 and Order No.x x-7/2001 (Pt-II) 6929/Bank-10 Dt.13.6.2003 of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Orissa, Bhubaneswar and Resolution No.08 Dated 26.09.2003 of the Meeting of the Committee of management of the Bank, the Cadre Secretaries working under common Cadre Scheme of the Bank are deemed to be as Employees of Keonjhar Central Cooperative bank Ltd., Keonjhar under Grade-VI-A of the Category of the service of the Bank. x xx xx xx xx" It is evident from the order passed by the authority U/s.26-B that this aspect has been taken into consideration and thereafter the order has been passed which according to my considered view cannot be said to be improper and unreasonable. 6. x xx xx xx xx" It is evident from the order passed by the authority U/s.26-B that this aspect has been taken into consideration and thereafter the order has been passed which according to my considered view cannot be said to be improper and unreasonable. 6. Moreover the petitioner, in pursuance to an enquiry initiated under section 7A of the EPF and MP Act 1952 which culminated into final order U/s.7A, has preferred an appeal U/s.7(i) before the Tribunal in which the petitioner has also assailed the order passed by the authority U/s.26-B and the same has been told to be pending before the appellate authority, in that view of the matter also this writ petition cannot be entertained, for ready reference the prayer made by the petitioner before the appellate tribunal as sought for under paragraph 9 under the heading "Relief(s) " is being referred herein below:- i) Admit and issue notice to the respondents; ii) After hearing the parties, to quash the order No.SRO/KJR/Circle/74/OR/835/1674, dated 27.11.2015 of Respondent No.2 passed in proceeding U/s.7-A of E.P.F. and M.P. Act, 1952 in respect of Keonjhar Central Cooperative Bank ltd., P.F. Code No.OR/835 under Annexure-1. iii) The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to quash order dtd.31.12.2014 passed by the Respondent No.1 proceeding under para 26-B of E.P.F. and M.P. Scheme, 1952 under Annexure-2. iv) And exonerate the appellant Bank from any liability as decided by Respondent No.2 under Annexure-1 in favour of Respondent No.3 and also declare that, the Respondent No.3 was employee of Bank w.e.f. 20.02.2003 to 27.11.2003 and he is not entitled any P.F. dues from Bank; and v) Allow the Appeal; vi) Pass such other order(s) / direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper." 7. In view thereof both on the ground of pendency of litigation already before the tribunal as also on merit as discussed herein above, there is no merit in this writ petition, as such the same is dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed