- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. The petitioner has sought writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 25-2-1995, rejecting the representation of the petitioner and writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the working of the petitioner as Technical Officer in Farrukhabad District Cooperative Bank.
(2.) THE facts in brief are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Technical Officer (Pravidhik Sahayak) on 18-1-1980 by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, U. P, Allahabad, THE petitioner was posted in Kisan Sahkair Bank under the new liberalised loan distri bution scheme. He continued to work there till 8-6-1990. The respondent No. 1 required services of an. Assistant Technical Officer for its Jalalabad Branch. He wrote a letter to the District Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, Farrukhabad, respondent No. 3, for pro viding one Technical Officer. On 5-5-1990 respondent No. 3 passed order attaching the petitioner as Assistant Technical Officer at Jalalabad Branch of Farrukhabad District Co-operative Bank. The petitioner joined there on 9-6-1990. He continued to work in the said branch. He made a repre sentation to respondent No. 1 that he should be paid salary in accordance with the revised pay scale. Respondent No. 1 did not pass any order. The petitioner filed writ petition No. 32247 of 1991. The writ petition was disposed of with the direction that the claim of the petitioner should be decided by respondent No. 1 within a period of six weeks by way of reasoned order. It appears that the representation was not decided. The petitioner filed contempt petition No. 2245 of 1994 for compliance of the order. Respondent No. 1 has now rejected the representation by order dated 25-2-1995, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to continue to work in District Co-operative Bank Farrukhabad. He was appointed by the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Farrukhabad in Kisan Sewa Sahkari, Samiti, Gursahaiganj (North) Uttar Pradesh and was posted at Jalalabad Branch of District Co-operative Bank by the order of the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Farrukhabad on 5th May, 1990 in District Co-operative Bank Farrukhabad Ltd. on which post he has no right to continue. The petitioner has challenged this order in the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner is serving as Assistant Technical Officer in Farrukhabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd. at its Jalalabad branch from 9th June, 1990 and was entitled to be absorbed in this Bank in regular service on the post on which he joined in this Bank. There are various other employees who had come on transfer or on deputation in Farrukhabad District Co- operative Bank Ltd. and their services have been regularised and there is no reason that the services of the petitioner be not regularised. The action of respondents 1 and 2 is mala fide as the petitioner has filed writ petition in this Court.
(3.) IT is admitted to the petitioner that he was appointed as Assistant Technical Officer on 18-1-1980 by the District Registrar, Co-operative Societies, U. P. Allahabad and he was functioning on the said post in Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Gursahaiganj, till 8th June 1980. IT was on the order passed by the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, U. P. , Farrukhabad, dated 5-5-1990 that the petitioner was transferred in the Farrukhabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd. The petitioner cannot claim any right of absorption in this Bank. The absorption requires the consert of the appointing authority who had initially appointed the peti tioner and also of the authority where he had been sent on deputation/ transfer. The petitioner has not shown that there was any agreement or conditions of service where in he was entitled for absorption in the Bank's services where he was sent on deputation/transfer. Respondent No. 1 had requested for providing the services of some Assistant Technical Officer to the District Assistant Registrar respondent No. 3 and on this request the petitioner was sent to respondent No. 1. He was posted at Jalalabad Branch of respondent No. 1, District Co-operative Bank, Firrukhabad. The second submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was entitled to payment of the revised pay-scale for the period he worked under respondent No. 1. The pay scale of the respon dent No. 1 was revised. The claim of the petitioner is that he was entitled to such revised pay scale and secondly, no discrimination should be made as against other employees of respondent No. 1 who were being paid salary for the same work which the petitioner was performing. The petitioner had filed writ petition No. 32247 of 1994 for mandamus directing the res pondents to pay revised pay scale of Rs. 1835. This Court disposed of the writ petition with the direction that respondent No. 1 shall dispose of the representation of the petitioner within six weeks. The representation has been rejected by order dated 25-2-1995 but the respondent No. 1 has not passed any order regarding the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary in accordance with the revised pay scale and, secondly, he should be treated at par in the matter of payment of salary to the employees who were working on class III post under respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 has rejected the representation of the petitioner by order, dated 25-2-1995 only considering the claim of the petitioner for absorption but no order has been passed regarding the claim of the petitioner for payment of the salary as claimed by him.;