AMRITSAR CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, AMRITSAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2014-11-411
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on November 14,2014

AMRITSAR CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, AMRITSAR Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The Amritsar Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Amritsar (for short 'the petitioner bank') has filed this writ petition praying for quashing the order dated 30.05.2011 (Annexure P-9) passed by Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Amritsar, whereby, the petitioner bank has been directed to make certain payments to Swaran Singh, Assistant Manager (Retd.) - respondent No.4, pertaining to the period when he was under suspension.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that Swaran Singh, respondent No.4 was appointed as Clerk in 'the Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Taran, (hereinafter referred to as 'Taran Taran Bank') on 19.05.1970 and thereafter was promoted as Junior Accountant. The Taran Taran bank was merged with the Amritsar Central Cooperative Bank (hereinafter referred to as "The Amritsar Bank") on 16.08.1979, and on such merger respondent No.4 became an employee of the Amritsar Bank. On account of some allegations of embezzlements, tampering of the record, committing fraud with the account holders, misusing his official position as well as for disobeying the orders of higher authorities, respondent No.4 was charge-sheeted. He was placed under suspension on 30.04.1993 but reinstated during pendency of enquiry on 15.07.1993. At the conclusion of the enquiry, the charges levelled against respondent No.4 were proved and vide resolution dated 30.12.1994 of the Board of Directors of the Amritsar Bank he was dismissed from service.
(3.) Aggrieved against the order dated 30.12.1994, respondent No.4 filed an appeal before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab Chandigarh, which was entrusted to Additional Registrar (Credit) for adjudication. The said appeal was allowed vide order dated 27.06.1996. The order of dismissal from service of respondent No.4 was set aside and it was ordered that the period between dismissal and reinstatement be treated as leave of kind due. Feeling aggrieved against the order dated 27.06.1996, the Amritsar Bank filed revision petition under Section 69 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') before Financial Commissioner, Cooperation, who vide his order dated 19.02.1998 set aside the order dated 27.06.1996 and directed the Registrar, Cooperative Societies to get a fresh enquiry conducted from an independent officer of the level of the Deputy Registrar. During pendency of the revision petition, respondent No. 4 was placed under suspension. This was challenged before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab and the appeal was accepted and respondent No.4 was ordered to be reinstated with all consequential benefits. During pendency of the fresh enquiry, the Amritsar bank again bifurcated on 30.04.1997 into two Central Cooperative Banks i.e. (i) The Amritsar Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as the "petitioner bank") and (ii) The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Taran (hereinafter referred to as " respondent No. 3" bank). Respondent No.4 was allocated to respondent No. 3 Bank on his own request and option. By order dated 30.10.1999 he was directed by the petitioner bank to join respondent No.3 - bank. The Deputy Registrar (Enforcement), who was appointed as an Enquiry Officer by the Registrar, concluded his enquiry report and submitted the same on 11.07.2001. In the said enquiry report, the charges levelled against respondent No.4 stood proved and imposition of major punishment was recommended. Respondent No.3 bank had passed a resolution for not accepting respondent No.4 as their employee till conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. Respondent No.4 filed a revision petition under Section 69 of the Act before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab, who vide order dated 03.10.2001(Annexure P-1) directed the petitioner bank to immediately relieve respondent No.4 to enable him to join his duties at respondent No.3 Bank. It was held that there was no reason for respondent No.3 Bank, to not allow respondent No.4 to join his duties. It was also directed that the petitioner bank would pay all the dues of respondent No.4 till he was relieved to join respondent No.3 Bank.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.