P RAMAN Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP SOCIETIES CADRE AUTHORITY IN RESPECT OF PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question raised in the present writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to receive his salary on the basis of G.O.Ms.131 of Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection Department dated 04.06.1999 or on the basis of 18(1) Settlement.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Secretary on 28.05.1975 in the 2nd respondent's office. From the date of his appointment, he was working till 27.8.96. But, unfortunately, on 28.8.1996, he was placed under suspension and a charge memo dated 18.10.1996 was issued and charges were framed against him and enquiry was conducted by the 2nd respondent. After the enquiry, the 2nd respondent has passed an order of dismissal from service on the petitioner by order dated 25.11.97 with retrospective effect from 28.8.96. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal from service, the petitioner preferred a revision petition on 11.5.98 before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Though an interim order of stay of the order of dismissal from service was granted by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the 2nd respondent challenged the grant of stay by filing W.P.No.12972/98 before this Court. Having seen the enquiry report as well as circumstances of the case, this Court set aside the interim order of stay, and directed the authority to hear the revision petition on merits, by order dated 8.10.98. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies passed an order of reinstatement of the petitioner in service by order dated 26.03.1999. Aggrieved by the order of reinstatement passed in favour of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent filed W.P.No.8113/99 before this Court, challenging the order under Article 226 of Constitution of India and this Court was pleased to remit the matter back to the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies by order dated 01.02.2000. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, again passed an order of reinstatement in service with backwages by order dated 24.4.2000. Once again aggrieved by the order of reinstatement of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent again filed W.P.No.8421/2000 before this Court, and this Court again after going into the entire background of the matter, ordered that the matter has to be reheard once again, and again the matter was remitted back to the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies by order dated 10.11.2000. Again even the 3rd time, the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies ordered reinstatement of the petitioner in service with full backwages with effect from 28.8.96, by passing a detailed order dated 9.4.2001. Aggrieved by the said order of direction directing the petitioner to be reinstated in service with full backwages, the 2nd respondent filed W.P.No.9869/2001 and obtained an order of interim stay on 14.8.2002. However, the writ petition was withdrawn by the 2nd respondent, and, thereby the order passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 9.4.2001 became final and the petitioner was reinstated in service. THEreafter, the petitioner filed W.P.No.41435/02 before this Court, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent herein to implement the order passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies vide his proceedings dated 9.4.2001, ordering reinstatement with full backwages with effect from 28.8.96. THE above said writ petition was also allowed by this Court. Since the 2nd respondent has failed to implement the above said order, the petitioner was constrained to file Contempt Petition No.653/2003. Pursuant to the contempt petition filed by the petitioner, he was reinstated in service with all backwages by order dated 30.01.2006. Finally, the entire backwages for the period from 28.8.96 to 2.12.2004, totalling a sum of Rs.13,22,007/- was finally sanctioned by the 2nd respondent in the above said order and the same was also deposited in the petitioner's savings account lying with the 2nd respondent society. In view of the contempt proceedings in Contempt Petition No.653/2003, the above said amount came to be deposited. But, out of Rs.13,22,007/-, a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- was deposited in fixed deposit in the 2nd respondent's bank for a period of one year from 01.03.2007. After the entire fixed deposit amount got matured on 2.3.2008, the petitioner sought for realization of the matured amount, but the 2nd respondent refused to pay the same on the ground that the 81 enquiry has been initiated and if for any reason the petitioner is found guilty in the 81 enquiry, the backwages pending with the 2nd respondent could be adjusted against the recovery of the money payable by the petitioner.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing on either side perused the materials available on record.