THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITIONS NO.19453 of 2006 Dated: 3.12.2010 Between: G.BALARAJ …Petitioner And: THE COMMISSIONER FOR COOPERATION, GOVT OF A.P. HYDERABAD & OTHERS. …Respondents. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITIONS NO.19453 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner, a Paid Secretary in Siddipet P.A.C.S., Siddipet, assails the proceeding dated 18.7.2005 terminating him from the said post with immediate effect. Admittedly, no disciplinary enquiry preceded this action. This Court had occasion to deal with a similar fact situation in W.P.No:8815 of 2001 which was allowed by order dated 2.12.2010. Reference was made therein to the Bye Laws which have application to the Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Societies and more specifically, Bye Law No:12.2 which categorically states that no punishment should be inflicted on any employee without proper enquiry in writing and providing him a reasonable opportunity to explain his case and defend himself. These Bye Laws, having been issued by the Registrar of Co- operative Societies, partake of statutory flavour and are binding on the P.A.C.Ss. Further, as per the said Bye Laws, the Chairman of the PACS is not the competent authority for removing the Paid Secretary from service. Smt. Bobba Vijayalakshmi, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent PACS, stated that the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner was based on the enquiry held under Section 51 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. This Court is however not inclined to accept that such enquiry can be the foundation for the severe disciplinary action visited upon the petitioner. As per the Bye Laws, the respondent P.A.C.S was bound to hold a disciplinary enquiry into the matter and only thereafter resort to such action through the competent authority. In the present case, this procedure has not been followed. Sri G.V.Shivaji, the learned counsel for the petitioner, further stated that when the petitioner sought to submit his explanation to the show cause notice issued to him, the same was not received by the Chairman of the respondent PACS. The envelope bearing the endorsement ‘reject’ is produced in support of this contention. Viewed from any angle, the action of the respondent P.A.C.S in terminating the petitioner from the post of Paid Secretary under the impugned proceeding cannot be sustained. It was passed not only in violation of the statutory procedure but also in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice. The writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned proceeding dated 18.7.2005 issued by the Chairman of the respondent P.A.C.S terminating the petitioner from the post of Paid Secretary. The petitioner shall be reinstated with all consequential benefits. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ Justice SANJAY KUMAR Date:3.12.2010 Gurc. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITIONS NO.19453 of 2006 Dated: 3.12.2010