IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND NINE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.547 of 2009 Between: V. Madhava Reddy ..... Petitioner AND Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Station Ghanpur, Ghanpur Mandal, Warangal District, rep., by its President & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Nandigam Krishna Rao Counsel for respondents 2&3: AGP for Cooperation This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.547 of 2009 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside orders dated 23.12.2008 and 30.12.2008 passed by respondent No.2 and 1 respectively. The petitioner is the Chief Executive Officer of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, Ghanpur (Station). During the inspection made by respondent No.2, he found huge deficit in cash balance and came to the prima facie conclusion that the petitioner, being the Chief Executive Officer, was responsible for the said irregularity. He, therefore, directed the Managing Committee of respondent No.1 Society vide his proceedings dated 23.12.2008 to place the petitioner under suspension for the alleged financial irregularities committed by him with immediate effect and report compliance. Following the said proceedings, respondent No.1 passed consequential order dated 30.12.2008 placing the petitioner under suspension. These two proceedings are assailed in this writ petition. On the previous occasion, when the writ petition was heard, this Court directed the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Cooperation to ascertain the stage of the enquiry. Today, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the enquiry is already completed and the enquiry officer is yet to submit the enquiry report to the disciplinary authority. Sri Nandigam Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, disputed this statement and submitted that recently the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 20.02.2009 directing repatriation of the Chief Executive Officers, who were appointed under common cadre and therefore there is a change in the disciplinary authority. In my considered view, the order of suspension passed pending enquiry in to the serious allegations made against the petitioner is not liable to be interfered with by this Court at this stage. However, respondent No.3 is directed to examine and decide as to the competent authority to take disciplinary action against the petitioner. If no final order has been passed, as held out by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, he shall take an appropriate decision regarding the authority, which should consider the enquiry report to be submitted by the enquiry officer and pass final order. Respondent No.3 shall ensure that the enquiry officer submits his enquiry report and that the disciplinary authority, who according to the learned counsel for the petitioner is the Divisional Cooperative Officer/Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Warangal, respondent No.2, passes final order on the basis of the enquiry report within a period of two months from today. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no subsistence allowance is being paid to the petitioner. The petitioner is given liberty to approach respondent No.2 by way of a representation and he shall consider and redress the grievance of the petitioner in this regard on such a representation being filed by the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.Nos.663 and 3783 of 2009 are also dismissed. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 27.04.2009 ES