THE CHHINIWAL COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED CHHINIWAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner - The Chinniwal Cooperative Agricultural Multipurpose Society Ltd. has filed this petition praying for directions to quash the order dated 3.5.2010 (Annexure P -4) passed by respondent No. 3, whereby, the petition filed by respondent No. 5 for setting aside the order dated 11.4.2007, by which he had been placed under suspension, which suspension had continued for more than six months without the approval of the Assistant Registrar and during which period he had not been paid any subsistence allowance, was allowed and he had been ordered to be reinstated in service. Also challenged is the order dated 12.7.2011 (Annexure P - 5) passed by respondent No. 2, whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner against the above order was dismissed.

(2.) THE relevant facts, in brief, as stated in the petition are that respondent No. 5 was appointed as a salesman in the petitioner Society in the year 1986. In the year 1989, he was promoted as the Secretary of the Society. In the year 2007, an FIR No. 10 under Sections 326, 325, 148, 149 IPC was registered against him. He was arrested on 29.3.2007 and remained confined in jail till 12.4.2007, when he was granted bail.

(3.) ON 18.8.2009, respondent No. 5 filed a petition under Rule 13 of the Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Societies Service Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "1997 Rules") challenging the continuance of his suspension beyond a period of six months without approval of the Assistant Registrar and non -payment of subsistence allowance as being in contravention of Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules. Respondent No. 3 vide his order dated 3.5.2010 ordered that respondent No. 5 be reinstated in service and his salary due after 11.4.2007 be disbursed to him. It was also held that the suspension order had not been passed in conformity with the service rules. The petitioner society filed revision petition against the above order. The revision was dismissed by respondent No. 2 vide order dated 12.7.2011. However, the order dated 3.5.2010 was modified to the extent that the resolution of the society dated 11.4.2007 was set aside for the reason that respondent No. 5 had not been paid his subsistence allowance after his suspension.