LAWS(MAD)-2011-6-694

P SOOSAI MANIKAM SECRETARY, SAVARIYARPATTINAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, RAMNAD REGION

Decided On June 30, 2011
P Soosai Manikam Secretary, Savariyarpattinam Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Bank Limited Appellant
V/S
Joint Registrar Of Co-Operative Societies, Ramnad Region Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner was appointed as the Secretary on 01.07.1991 in the third Respondent society. The Petitioner was terminated from service by an order dated 18.11.2005 of the second Respondent. The termination was on the ground that while he was appointed in the year 1991, he was over aged. It is stated in the said order that Rule 149 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1988 stipulats that the employees should be less than 40 years at the time of appointment. The date of birth of the Petitioner is 04.05.1951. When he was appointed, he was 40 years and two months old. It is also stated in the termination order that this Court while disposing W.A. Nos. 2501 and 2502 of 2001 on 24.10.2002 issued direction to amend the Special Bye laws in terms of Rule 149 of the Rules. After the Special Bye laws were registered in accordance with law, the Deputy Registrars were directed to undertake the exercise within 60 days thereafter to find out whether any person was appointed irregularly. It is stated that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Petitioner was terminated from service.

(2.) The Petitioner filed W.P. No. 11277 of 2005 against the temination order and interim stay was obtained on 14.02.2006. He was reinstated in service. However, the writ petition was dismissed on 06.07.2007 on the ground that there is an alternate remedy available to the Petitioner to question the termination order. The Petitioner preferred a revision petition before the first Respondent. The first Respondent rejected the revision petition on 31.07.2008. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition to quash the order dated 31.07.2008 of the first Respondent and the order of the second Respondent dated 18.11.2005 referred to above.

(3.) On the other hand, the third Respondent filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations. No. counter affidavit is filed by the other Respondents.