SHANTI BAI TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the Order (Annexure P/6) dated 06.11.2017 passed by respondent no.3 in Case No.78(1)- 32/2017.

(2.) The petitioner is the widow of late Bhaiyalal who was the employee of respondent no.4/Bank. The Bank treating his date of birth to be 01.01.1939, retired him on 31.12.1996 vide order dated 05.12.1996. The aforesaid order was challenged by Bhaiyalal in a dispute preferred under Section 55(1) of the M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short "the Act") contending that his date of birth was 01.01.1949 and he was erroneously retired 10 years prior to his date of retirement. The aforesaid dispute was contested by the Bank, however, the authority decided the dispute in favour of the petitioner's husband and vide order dated 07.03.1998 directed the Bank to treat the petitioner in service taking into account his date of birth as 01.01.1949 . The aforesaid order was challenged by the respondent/Bank unsuccessfully before the Joint Registrar, then cooperative tribunal and up to the High Court. Writ Petition No.1592/2000 preferred by the respondent/Bank was dismissed on 21.11.2006 upholding the order passed by the Assistant Registrar dated 07.03.1998.

(3.) In compliance of order dated 21.11.2006, Bhaiyalal gave his joining on 23.12.2006. As the respondent/Bank did not accept the joining, petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by way of filing WP No. 138/2007 and this Court on 30.10.2009 directed the Joint Registrar to decide the matter. During the pendency of proceedings, in the year 2012, Bhaiyalal died and his wife/present petitioner was brought on record. The Deputy Registrar found that petitioner had been unnecessarily harassed by the respondent/Bank and vide order dated 08.08.2014 quashed the order dated 05.12.1996.