Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Registrar, Co -operative U.P. Lucknow, dated 23.9.2015, whereby the order passed by the District Administrative Committee, dated 15.9.2015, has been stayed. Petitioner was initially appointed as an Accountant in the society, and was subsequently screened out to function as Bank Ex -Cadre Secretary of the society. Upon a representation made by the petitioner, the District Administrative Committee passed a resolution transferring the petitioner from the post of Secretary, Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd. to the post of Managing Director, Lalitpur Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti. The decision was taken by the District Administrative Committee, vide its resolution No. 3 in its meeting on 4th September, 2015, and a communication pursuant to such decision of the District Administrative Committee was issued under the orders of Member Secretary of the District Administrative Committee. Respondent No. 5, who was aggrieved by the order of the District Administrative Committee, approached the Deputy Registrar, who, exercising his jurisdiction under Sec. 128 of the U.P. Co -operative Societies Act, 1965, has proceeded to stay the communication issued by the Member Secretary of the District Administrative Committee, which is as sailed in this petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Deputy Registrar had no jurisdiction in the matter, inasmuch as Registrar's jurisdiction under Sec. 128 of the Act would be available only in respect of a resolution of a co -operative society or an order passed by an officer of a co -operative society in certain cases, and would not extend to an order of the District Administrative Committee constituted under the U.P. Primary Agricultural Co -operative Credit Societies Centralized Service Rules, 1976, particularly as such order is subject to appeal under Rule 8 (x) of 1976 Rules before the State Cadre Authority.
(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed by Sri K.B. Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5, and it has been contended with reference to paragraph -7 that any communication of the officer of a co -operative society is subject to exercise of jurisdiction under Sec. 128 of the Act, and since the communication dated 15.9.2015 was by the Member Secretary, who is an officer defined under the Act, as such, the jurisdiction under Sec. 128 of the Registrar was clearly available.;