Govind Mathur, J. - (1.) BOTH these petitions for writ being based on same facts were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) THE Managing Director of the petitioner Co -operative Bank by an order dt. 21.09.2001 dismissed Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma (respondent No. 3) from service and the order aforesaid came to be confirmed by the appellate authority vide order dt. 19.01.2004. By way of filing a revision petition under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Co -operative Societies Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2001"), validity, propriety and correctness of the orders referred above was assailed by the respondent No. 3 before the State Government. The petitioner objected maintainability of that on the count that under Section 107 of the Act of 2001, the State Government is empowered to revise the orders passed by the officers subordinate to it and not otherwise. The objection was turned down by the Minister for Department of Cooperative Societies, hence by way of filing a writ petition (SBCWP No. 4848/ 2004), the petitioner challenged the same. The writ petition referred above, came to be disposed of on 17.09.2005 by following order: Both these Writ Petitions involve identical controversy were listed in the Court for admission on 03.11.2004, on which date notices were ordered to be issued thereafter on 12.04.2005 when the writ petition No. 4848 was listed in the Court it was stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the controversy which has been alleged in this writ petition is identical to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2688/1998 - Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan decided on 07.05.2003 and D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 502/2003 Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan decided on 08.08.2003. Therefore, the files of that writ petition and Special Appeal were ordered to be tagged with it and the writ petition was ordered to be listed along with the writ petition No. 4849/2004. Today learned Counsel for the respondent also agree with the aforesaid submission that the controversy alleged in the present writ petitions is covered by the two aforesaid judgments and further submitted that these judgments have been affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court vide judgment dt. 05.01.2005 which is reported in, (2005) 2 SCC -334 Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan. In that view of the matter for the same reasons these writ petitions are also disposed of granting/refusing the same reliefs as has been done in the aforesaid judgments. In the case of Ishwar Singh referred in the order dt. 17.11.2005, it was held that under Section 128 of the Rajasthan Co -operative Societies Act, 1965 (proposed para materia to Section 107 of the Act of 2001), the State Government is competent to revise the orders passed by the Registrar or Additional Registrar being officers subordinate. After disposal of the writ petition, learned Minister to the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Cooperatives, again started proceedings relating to the revision petition, therefore, an objection was again raised by the petitioner regarding continuation of revision petition on the ground that it could have not been maintained being the order challenged was not passed by any of the officers subordinate to the Registrar or by the Registrar of the Co -operative Societies. The objection was turned down by learned Minister on 21.02.2006 and the revision petition was fixed for hearing on merits on 07.03.2006, hence this petition for writ is preferred.
(3.) THE only contention of counsel for the petitioner is that under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Co -operative Societies Act, the State Government is empowered to revise an order passed by the Registrar or by the officers subordinate to it and officers of the Bank who passed the orders impugned are not subordinate to the Registrar or to the State Government, therefore, no revision petition as per Section 107 of the Act of 2001 can be maintained.;