AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Eswaraiah, J.—This writ petition is filed to continue the petitioner in service by declaring the proceedings dated 06/07/2000 made by the General Manager, District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Kakinada, in placing him under suspension pending enquiry into the lapses alleged to have been committed by him as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to Section 116-AA of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ''the Act'') read with Rule 72 (3) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules (for short ''the Rules'').
The facts in brief are as follows: -The petitioner is working as Secretary in the Tanukuvada Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society - 4th respondent herein. He was initially appointed as Secretary at Manjeru P.A.C.S. in the year 1979 and thereafter he was transferred to Jagannathagri P.A.C.S. While so, after introduction of Section 116-AA by A.P. Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 1985 (Act 21/ 85), the Government abolished common cadre for all the categories of the employees other than those specified in Section 116-AA of the Act. As per Section 116-AA of the Act, it shall be lawful for the Registrar to allot, subject to such rules as may be made in this behalf, the employees included in the cadre so abolished to such Primary Agricultural Credit Societies. As per proviso to Section 116-AA, until they are allotted, the respective employees shall continue in the posts in which they are working at the commencement of the Amendment Act. Accordingly, Rule 72 has been made prescribing the guidelines to allot decaderised Secretaries to the P.A.C.Ss. As per Rule 72(3), the Secretary on allotment to a Society, shall be deemed to be the employee of that Society and shall be entitled to receive pay and allowance from the funds of the said society and the service conditions of the Secretaries shall be governed by such regulations as may be framed by the Registrar for adoption by the Societies. As per Rule 72 (4), the Society shall exercise, the disciplinary control over the Society subject to the rules laid down in Service Regulations issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies adopted by the Societies. As per proviso to Sub-rule (4) of Rule 72, if any disciplinary proceedings is pending on the date of the abolition of the common cadre, shall be conducted against the concerned. Secretary by the Society to which he stands allotted in accordance with such service regulations.
Rule 72 was framed by G.O. Ms. No. 454 (Co-op IV) dated 13/09/1985. By G.O. Ms. No. 704 (Co-op IV) dated 04/12/1987, Sub-rule (5) was added to Rule 72 to deal with the situation in respect of the Secretaries who are not allotted and continuing in the posts of their respective places to P.A.C.Ss. for the purpose of disciplinary control, it is clarified that such of those Paid Secretaries who are not allotted on decaderised Secretaries on abolition of such common cadre, shall be governed by the common cadre regulations alone existing prior to the abolition of common cadre of the Secretaries and the General Managers of the Co-operative Central Banks on a decision by the Registrar are empowered to initiate disciplinary action against such Secretaries for the lapses committed by them in the Societies after decaderisation.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the guidelines issued under Rule 72 of the Rules and the guidelines issued from time to time by the Commissioner of Co-operation and the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, the District Collector (Co-operation), Kakinada by his letter dated 09/05/1987 in RC No. 16223/84-A allotted the petitioner Sri V. Kameswara Rao, who was working as Secretary of the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. to work as Secretary of the reorganized Jagannathagiri, P.A.C.S. and as per the said allotment he became the employee of the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. and the Society of the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. is alone entitled to exercise disciplinary control over the petitioner. He further submitted that in respect of the East Godavari District all the decaderised Secretaries have not been allotted but only some of the decaderised Secretaries have been allotted as per Rule 72 as there was a stay in W. P. 1026/90 directing the stay of the allotment of decaderised Secretaries which was initially granted for two weeks on 31/01/1990 in WP MP No. 1298/90 which was continued by order dated 20/02/1990 and the WPMP was disposed of on 20/04/1990 with certain directions permitting the petitioners therein to prefer objections, if any, before the Collector, Co-operation, Kakinada, with regard to the so-called anomalies of the seniority list of the Secretaries and consider such objections before the allotment of decaderised Secretaries. It is stated that the petitioner is not one of the objectors and the said orders have no application to his case as he was already allotted as Secretary to Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. and the said allotment by the Collector, Co-operation (Kakinada) made in proceedings in RC No. 16223/84-A dated 09/05/1987 has become final as it was not questioned by anybody in any proceedings.
It is stated that the special byelaws relating to the service conditions of the employees of P.A.C.S. have been made dealing with the appointments, service conditions, disciplinary control, appeal against the punishment etc. It is submitted that following the decaderisation in 1985, pursuant to the incorporation of Section 116-AA of the Act and on the allotment of the petitioner as Secretary of Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. by the Collector Co-operation, Kakinada, the petitioner became long time employee of the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. and as per the circulars issued by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, the Secretaries of P.A.C.S. are not transferable, but there can be an interchange within the district with mutual consent in respect of the Secretaries. Accordingly, the petitioner and other Paid Secretaries have made a representation before the General Manager, East Godavari District Cooperative Central Bank to transfer them and the General Manager vide his letter dated 27/01/1993 in reference No. DEV/SEC Cell/92-93 recommended to the District Cooperation Officer, Kakinada, to transfer the petitioner - V. Kameswara Rao from the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. as the Presidents of the concerned P.A.C.Ss and the Secretaries have given their consent for the transfer. Accordingly, the District Cooperation Officer, Kakinada, vide his letter in RC No. 2570/92-A dated 03/02/1993 permitted the General Manager District Cooperation Central Bank Limited, Kakinada, to effect the transfer of the petitioner from the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. as the Presidents of the respective Societies and the Secretaries have given their consent. Pursuant to the granting of the permission by the District Co-operative Officer, Kakinada vide his letter dated 03/02/1993, the General Manager of the District Cooperative Central Bank, Kakinada, transferred the petitioner from Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. and as per the said proceedings, the petitioner got relieved as Secretary from Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. on- 20/02/1993 and joined as Secretary at Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. on 22/02/1993. Thus, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner was originally allotted as Secretary to Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S., he became the permanent employee of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. and we has transferred on the consent of the Society and his permanent allotment continues to be in force, and therefore, the General Manager cannot transfer him as he has no power or any authority either to transfer him or to take any disciplinary proceedings but the Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. alone is competent to take any disciplinary action against him as per the bye laws and the regulations. The suspension order made by the General Manager is without jurisdiction and non-est in law, as he became the permanent employee on such allotment by transfer to the 4th respondent Society.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents strenuously contended that though the petitioner was allotted to Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S., there is no allotment in favour of the petitioner in respect of the Tanukuvada P.A.C.S., and therefore, he cannot be treated as an allotted Secretary of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S., and therefore. Rule 72 (5) of Rules alone is applicable as he is not one of the allotted Secretaries to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. and the General Manager is competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against him. It is further submitted that out of 22 districts, the allotment of the decaderised Secretaries was completed only in 18 districts. In view of the interim orders, the allotment is incomplete in respect of the East Godavari District. As already stated supra, the petitioner is one of the allotted Secretaries on decaderisation and the said allotment order dated 09/05/1987 made by the District Collector, Cooperation, Kakinada, has not been challenged and it has become final and though he was allotted as Secretary of Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S., with the mutual consent and the agreement of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. he was transferred from Jagannathagiri to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S., and therefore, he became the permanent employee of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S.. Having given consent for the transfer of the petitioner, Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. cannot contend that the petitioner is not its permanent employee. As per the proceedings dated 03/02/1993 of the District Cooperation Officer, Kakinada, and the proceedings of the General Manager, The District Cooperative Central Bank, Kakinada dated 04/02/1993, it is clear that a consent was given by the President of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. for the transfer of the petitioner, and therefore, he is deemed to have been allotted as Secretary of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S. and the 4th respondent Society will have all powers to take disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.
The powers were delegated u/s 72 to the District Collectors for allotment of the Secretaries and accordingly the District Collector after obtaining option of the petitioner, President of the Jagannathagiri P.A.C.S. and the consent of the President of Tanukuvada P.A.C.S., he was transferred to Tanukuvada P.A.C.S., and therefore, his allotment continues on his transfer to Respondent No. 4 Society. The petitioner is permanent employee of the 4th respondent - Society and the 4th respondent-Society is competent to take disciplinary action against the petitioner. As the petitioner is the permanent employee of the 4th respondent Society and 4th respondent alone is competent to take disciplinary action and can place the petitioner under suspension for the irregularities committed by him and the order passed by the 3rd respondent is without jurisdiction and contrary to Section 116-AA read with Rules 72(3) and 72(4) of the Rules.
The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed, the impugned order is set aside. However, it is open for the 4th respondent to take appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law.