R.K.Mahajan, J. - (1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 7-10-1983 passed by the respondent No. 2 and the appellate order dated 18-3-1996 (received by the petitioner on 6-6-1986) Annexure Nos. 5 and 7 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed that a writ of mandamus against the respondents to pay the salary and to treat him in continuous service be issued.
(2.) At the very outset in may be mentioned that this court passed an order on 12-11-1983 that the petitioner be treated in service within a month of production of certified copy of the order. Another order was passed on 12-5-1983 that the petitioner will be paid the current salary in future regularly from the date he joins and question of back salary will be decided at the time of the final hearing. The brief facts are mentioned hereunder.
(3.) The petitioner was appointed as Secretary, Primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Society on 14-5-1978 and was made permanent on 25-2-1982. The petitioner allege;: that he is governed by the provisions of U.P. Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies (Centralised Service) Rules, 1976, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and Regulations made therein. It appears that the petitioner was suspended on 13-3-1982 for indiscipline and misconduct vide resolution, dated 24-2-1982 by the District Administrative Committee and later on after accepting an explanation in pursuance of show-cause notice dated 22-4-1983 the District Administrative Committee passed a resolution on 6-8-1985 vide Annexure No. 4 reinstating the petitioner. It is alleged that the petitioner was reinstated on 10/11-8-1933. But subsequently his services were terminated by order dated 7-10-1983 for financial irregularities. It is contended by the petitioner that no enquiry was held nor any charge-sheet was served on him regarding the second termination and as such impugned order of termination dated 7-10-1983 is liable to be quashed. It is also averred by the petitioner that there is complete violation of Regulations 58 and 59. The petitioner has also described the order of the appellate authority as illegal as the appellate authority did not take into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner in para No. 14 of the writ petition has explained that in fact no fertilizer was available at Makanpur Asravey Kalan Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Vikas Khand Newada, Allahabad and the petitioner had issued only cheques to the members of the Society and they were provided fertilizer by Kadirpur Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Vikas Khand, Allahabad and as such he was not responsible for any illegality. On the aforesaid grounds the petitioner has described his termination as arbitrary and inoperative.;