IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 2467 of 1989 Date of decision: 17th December, 2008 Mohan Singh Soondh … Petitioner Versus Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Ms. Jagdeep Bains, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashwani Prashar, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present writ petition has been filed by Mohan Singh Soondh, who was then working as Branch Manager, Branch Office, Mehli of the Nawanshahar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Nawanshahar. He has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction for setting aside the order dated 21st November, 1988 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Enforcement), Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh and order dated 22nd September, 1987 passed by Supervisory Officer of the Nawanshahar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Nawanshahar, whereby punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect was awarded upon the petitioner. Case of the petitioner is that he was working as Branch Manager in Branch Office, Mehli of the Nawanshahar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Nawanshahar, when along with other two officials, he was chargesheeted on 6th April, 1987. It has been averred that the Inquiry Civil Writ Petition No.2467 of 1989 Officer reported that from the facts, the charges are proved but same have been committed in routine and not intentionally. In view of the report of the Inquiry Officer, the Supervisory Officer, vide his order dated 22nd September, 1987, imposed penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. Order of the Supervisory Officer was conveyed to the petitioner on 17th October, 1987. It has been stated before this Court that Supervisory Officer has no authority or competence to award punishment, as it has been held by this Court in ‘Brij Kishore Arora v. Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh’ (P&H) (DB) 1993(3) PLR 340, that Supervisory Officer is alien to cooperative movement. It has been urged by the Counsel that the Supervisory Officer is a species, unknown to law, as there is no provision either in the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act or the rules framed thereunder. Counsel for the respondent has conceded this legal proposition, however has contended that Bank has suffered a loss of interest on an amount of Rs.84,622/- for a period of 39 days due to negligence of petitioner. Therefore, on the basis of inquiry report, matter be remanded to the concerned punishing authority to award punishment afresh. In the present case, incident pertains to year 1987. It has been stated before this Court that the employee has taken voluntary retirement. Since the employee has taken voluntary retirement and has settled abroad, no orders are called for, as even though one increment is restored, the appointing authority will be well within its rights to determine the punishment afresh, as there is a charge that due to mistake, loss of interest on amount of Rs.84,622/- for 39 days has been suffered by the Bank. 2 Civil Writ Petition No.2467 of 1989 In view of the fact that 23 years have passed, let the matter rest as and where it was, as initiation of further proceedings will serve no useful purpose and will not be in interest of both the parties. With these observations, present writ petition stands dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE December 17, 2008 rps 3