RAJENDRA BEHARI JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22. 12. 1995 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. The appellant had filed the writ petition, S. B. Civil Writ Petition no. 5492/1995, for quashing the order of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bundi dated 9. 3. 1993 rescinding the resolution of the Bundi Zila Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank') as well as the appellate order of the Additional Registrar (Appeals), Cooperative Societies, Kota dated 3. 11. 1995 dismissing the appeal of the appellant preferred against the said order of the Assistant Registrar.

(2.) FACTS of the case, briefly stated, are that on 7. 8. 1982 the appellant was appointed on a class IV post on temporary basis under resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent-Bank dated 6. 8. 1982. By order dated 10. 8. 1982 the appellant was directed to perform the duties of clerk keeping in view his academic qualification of secondary pass and experience. On 18. 11. 1986 he was appointed as cashier -cum- clerk in the scale of Rs. 400-1343. It is stated that the said appointment was pursuant to the resolution of the Board of Directors dated 18. 11. 1986. Though the appointment was supposed to be for a period of three months, it was continued from time to time. On 12. 1. 1990 the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bundi issued notice under Section 32 to the Bank to show cause why the resolution dated 6. 6. 1989 extending the appellant's appointment as clerk-cumcashier be not rescinded. The proceeding was dropped on 2. 5. 1990. However another notice was issued on 23. 3. 1993 under Section 32 of the Co-operative Societies Act 1965 calling upon the bank to show cause why the resolution dated 18. 11. 1986 be not rescinded. By the impugned order, finally, the resolution dated 18. 11. 1986 was rescinded by the Assistant Registrar. As indicated above, the appellant preferred appeal before the Addtioinal Registrar (Appeals) which was dismissed by order dated 3. 11. 1995.

(3.) AS seen above, it is the specific case of the respondents that notice was given to the respondent bank and not to the appellant. In that view of the matter, we are satisfied that there was violation of rules of natural justice and the impugned order of the ASsistant Registrar is fit to be set aside on this ground alone.