LAWS(KER)-2016-9-77

E K AUGUSTINE Vs. STATE OF KERALA; JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THUDANGANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD; THUDANGANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD

Decided On September 08, 2016
E K AUGUSTINE Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA; JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES; BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THUDANGANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD; THUDANGANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ petitions relate to the dismissal of the Secretary of the Thudanganad Service Co-operative Bank. While the Bank is challenging the order of Government which upheld the action of Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies in rescinding the resolution to dismiss the Secretary, the employee is seeking implementation of the order challenged by the Bank. The employee challenges the order of Joint Registrar and the Bank to the extent it relates to regularisation of the period of suspension. Since common issue arises in these cases, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. The parties and documents referred to in this judgment are as described in W.P.(C) No. 2165 of 2005, unless specifically provided otherwise.

(2.) The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.2165 of 2005 is a service co- operative bank. The Bank filed the writ petition challenging the orders of the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies by which the resolution passed by the Co-operative Society dismissing the 3rd respondent and the decision of the managing committee rejecting the appeal filed by the bank were rescinded under rule 176 of the Kerala Co-operative Rules, 1969. The appeal filed by the bank was also dismissed as per Ext.P23 order by the Government. The facts leading to the case are as follows:

(3.) The 3rd respondent was working as Secretary of the petitioner Bank. While so he was placed under suspension as per Ext.P1 order dated 8.2.1999. Thereafter memo of charges were issued to him on 29.2.1999 as per Ext.P2, which contained ten charges along with statement of allegations. The charges included misappropriation, unauthorised absence etc. Thereafter an enquiry was conducted by the subcommittee and the subcommittee took a decision on 20.11.2000 to dismiss the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent filed an appeal before the managing committee and thereupon the managing committee as per its decision dated 5.3.2001 affirmed the dismissal. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the petitioner approached the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies filing Ext.P7 petition requesting to invoke the powers of the Joint Registrar under rule 176 and to rescind resolution.