THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 15146 of 2004 Dated: 05.08.2010 Between: V.Hari Narayana ..... PETITIONER AND The Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, Thouklapur, Rep. by its Person-In-Charge/Chairman, Gundlapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: L.J.Veera Reddy and L.Renuka Rani Counsel for the Respondent: ---- The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 15146 of 2004 ORDER : The petitioner herein is appointed as a paid secretary in the respondent-Society in the year 1984. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the order dated 21.07.2004 passed by the respondent placing the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect is arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite notice, none appeared for the respondent and no counter affidavit is filed. The suspension of officer or servant of society is provided under Section 59 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’) according to which, in the course of an audit under Section 50 or an inquiry under Section 51 or an inspection under Section 52 or Section 53, if it is brought to the notice of the Registrar that a paid officer or servant of a society has committed any misappropriation, the Registrar may if in his opinion there is prima facie evidence against such paid officer, direct the committee pending the investigation and disposal of the matter, to place such paid officer under suspension and thereafter the committee shall place the paid officer under suspension forthwith. The specific case of the petitioner in the instant case is that no such direction was issued by the Registrar and the impugned order of suspension was passed by the respondent-Society on its own. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondent and the said plea of the petitioner remained contraverted. It is also relevant to note that as per Section 31-A (15) of the Act, the committee of a society can exercise the power of suspension of any officer or servant of the society only under Section 59 of the Act. On a combined reading of Section 31-A(15) and Section 59 of the Act, it is clear that the society is not competent to pass an order of suspension of a paid officer in the absence of any direction from the Registrar. In the instant case the respondent-Society failed to place before this Court any material to show that such a direction was there by the Registrar. The impugned order also does not refer to any such direction by the Registrar. Accordingly, the impugned order of suspension being illegal and without jurisdiction, is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed as prayed for. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 05.08.2010 Ivd