Telangana High Court
WP/16481/2009 of N.Srinivasa Rao Vs DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES on 31 December 2014
CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No.16481 OF 2009 O R D E R: The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the letter issued by the 2nd respondent- the Morasapudi Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, Morasapudi, Nuzvid, on 08.08.2009 informing him that he is being removed from the service of
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAMWRIT PETITION No.16481 OF 2009
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R:
The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the letterissued by the 2[nd] respondent-the Morasapudi Primary AgriculturalCooperative Society, Morasapudi, Nuzvid, on 08.08.2009 informinghim that he is being removed from the service of the Society,without there being any show cause notice, calling for explanationand conducting enquiry, merely on the instructions of ManagingCommittee.
2) This Court while ordering Rule Nisi on20.08.2009, passed interim suspension as prayed for in W.P.M.P.No.21654 of 2009. Therefore, the respondent No.1 filedW.V.M.P.No.3507 of 2009 along with a detailed counter-affidavitand sought to vacate the interim order dated 20.08.2009. Whenthe said vacate petition came up for consideration, with theconsent of counsel appearing for the parties, writ petition is takenup for final disposal.
3) It is the contention of the petitioner’s counsel thatex facie the order dated 08.08.2009 is in violation of the principlesof natural justice and is liable to be set aside.
4) Though a counter affidavit has been filed by the1[st] respondent setting out the irregularities which are alleged tohave been committed by the petitioner, they are not the subjectmatter of the writ petition. It has also been stated in the counteraffidavit filed by the 1[st] respondent that proceedings under Section51 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act of 1964 (in short “the Act”) have been initiated with respect to the affairs ofthe Society and to fix responsibility on the persons involved withrespect to those irregularities. Further, it has been stated by the1[st] respondent in the counter affidavit that the instructions wereissued to the 2[nd] respondent to keep the petitioner undersuspension pending enquiry, instead of implementing the saidinstruction, the 2[nd] respondent straight away instructed thepetitioner to be removed from the service and thus acted beyondinstructions. It may be noted that there is no denial of theallegations that petitioner was not issued any notice or opportunityprior to issuance of the impugned proceedings.
5) In the light of the above impugned order havingbeen passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, thesaid impugned order is set aside. However, it is open for therespondent to initiate and proceed with the disciplinaryproceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law.
6) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitionspending, if any, shall also stand dismissed.
-----------------------------------
CHALLA KODANDA RAM, JDated:31.12.2014.Ssv