A RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOP SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN W.P.No.8459 of 2002, the petitioner has prayed for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner from the date of suspension till the alleged date or removal of the petitioner on 26.2.2002.

(2.) IN W.P.No:8533 of 2002, the very same petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records relating to the impugned orders passed by the second respondent in his proceedings No.nill dated 26.2.202, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service of the second respondent Bank with all attendant benefits, backwages, continuity of service and seniority.

(3.) THE petitioner claims that he has made a number of representations including representation on 20.8.2001, 10.9.2001 etc.,. Surprisingly on 26.2.2002 an order has been passed by the second respondent as if the petitioner has been dismissed from service with retrospective effect from 1.3.1992. It is rather extraordinary for the second respondent to dismiss or remove the petitioner with retrospective effect. It is contended that action of the respondent is arbitrary, illegal, violative of bye laws as well as the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act and principles of natural justice. Indefinite suspension is punitive and without framing charges and without proceeding further with respect to the alleged misconduct, if any, there cannot be any order of dismissal or removal from service much less, retrospectively.