- (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition under Art. 226 dated February 26, 2009 is questioning a decision of the Secretary of Chandanbati Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., a co-operative society registered under the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, dated November 10, 2008 dismissing him from service with immediate effect. On November 1, 2001 the Board of the co-operative society took a resolution to appoint the petitioner as a casual staff of the co-operative society from December 1, 2001. Accordingly, the co-operative society issued a letter offering the appointment and accepting the offer the petitioner reported for duty and started working. On August 26, 2002 the Board took a resolution to appoint him as the Cashier of the co-operative society on a permanent basis and he was appointed as such. A case being Sagardihi P.S. Case No. 140/06 dated October 18, 2006 was registered under section 498-A/306 IPC concerning death of the petitioner's wife. The petitioner was named as an accused. He was arrested on October 18, 2006 and released on bail by an order dated February 19, 2007. He gave a lawyer's notice dated March 23, 2007 that the Secretary of the co-operative society was not allowing him to attend office and work.
(2.) Under cover of a letter dated March 23, 2007 the Secretary gave him a copy of a resolution of the Board dated November 30, 2006 suspending him for his detention in jail custody. By a letter dated April 5, 2007 the Secretary informed him that by a resolution dated March 28, 2007 the Board dismissed him from service.
(3.) Feeling aggrieved the petitioner moved a writ petition No. 8431(W) of 2007 before this Court under Art. 226. By a decision dated June 26, 2007 the writ petition was disposed of. The decision to dismiss the petitioner was set aside. The co-operative society was given liberty to initiate disciplinary proceedings by issuing charge-sheet. The petitioner's appeal against the Single Bench decision was partly allowed by a decision dated February 25, 2008. The Division Bench modified the Single Bench decision as to the time limit for completion of the disciplinary proceedings.;