HARISH ACHARYA MAJOR, PRESIDENT, SRI K. JAYARAM MAJOR, GENERAL MANAGER AND VISHWAKARMA SAHAKARA BANK LTD. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KARNATAKA STATE URBAN BANKS FEDERATION, THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS 1 and 2 are the President and General Manager respectively of the 3rd petitioner - Vishwakarma Sahakara Bank Ltd., Mangalore -575 001. Based on an enquiry report dated 17.11.2008, the 3rd respondent was compulsorily retired from service, which was assailed in a dispute filed under Section 70 of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 ("the Act" for short) before the 1st respondent. The dispute having been allowed, feeling aggrieved, the 3rd respondent has filed Appeal No. 476/2012, in the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Since the impugned award has not been stayed and was not been given effect to, 3rd respondent has filed a petition under S. 111(2) of the Act, before the 2nd respondent, to accord permission for prosecution of the petitioners, for not giving effect to the award dated 21.5.2012. A notice of the proceeding initiated under S. 111(2) of the Act, as at Annexure -A, having been issued, this writ petition has been filed to quash the said notice and direct the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal to hear and decide Appeal No. 476/2012 expeditiously. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, since Appeal No. 476/2012 is pending before the Tribunal, 3rd respondent is unjustified in seeking permission for prosecution of petitioners alleging non -implementation of the award dated 21.5.2012, which has not attained finality and that the 2nd respondent has mechanically issued the notice as at Annexure -A. Learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal may be directed to decide the appeal expeditiously and that the appellant would render necessary co -operation for disposal of the appeal within the stipulated period.

(2.) SRI N. Ramachandra, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent on the other hand submitted that time and again, appellant in Appeal No. 476/2012 has obtained adjournments and since 3rd respondent has been kept out of employment with effect from 17.11.2008, he being left with no other alternative, initiated proceeding under S. 111(2) of the Act. Learned counsel submitted that, but for the request/s made by the petitioners, Appeal No. 476/2012 would have been decided by the Tribunal. Learned counsel submitted that in the circumstances, petitioners are not entitled to any relief.