IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 7741 of 2006 Between: E. Madhava Reddy, S/o. Raji Reddy, R/o. Palamakulu, Nangnoor Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Cooperative Officer, Medak District, at Sangareddy. 2 The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Siddipet, Medak District. 3 The Doulthabad PACS, Doulthabad, Medak District, Rep by its President .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension vide the impugned proceedings Rc.No. 1/PACS/2004, dated 17-5-2004 in spite of lapse of period of suspension mentioned therein and further action of the respondents in not paying subsistence allowances and arrears as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India apart from contrary to the provisions of A.P.C.S. Act and pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.V.SHIVAJI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Secretary in Doulthabad Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, the third respondent herein. He was placed under suspension on 17.05.2004. He filed this writ petition complaining that the respondents are not paying the subsistence allowance. The petitioner makes a reference to the manner in which he was appointed and the emoluments that they have extended to him from time to time as well as the writ petitions filed in relation to the fixation of pay scales. He states that the society did not pay the regular salary for certain period before he was placed under suspension and the subsistence allowance thereafter. On behalf of the third respondent, a counter-affidavit is filed stating that the petitioner had resorted to several acts of indiscipline. It is stated that on his own accord, the petitioner has withdrawn huge funds of the society towards his salary beyond his entitlement. It is also stated that in the inspection caused under Section 52 of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, it was found that the petitioner misappropriated a sum of Rs.94,394/- and three execution petitions being, E.P.Nos.155, 177 and 184 of 2004 are pending against him for recovery of the misappropriated amount. The further allegation of the third respondent is that the petitioner had taken away the entire record of the society including his personal service record and in spite of repeated requests and notices, he did not return the same. According to the third respondent, the school in which the petitioner studied has certified that his date of birth is 02.10.1945 and in that view of the matter, the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation on 02.10.2003 itself. Several other contentions also urged. The petitioner was placed under suspension vide orders, dated 17.05.2004. In that view of the matter, he is entitled to be paid the subsistence allowance, as provided for under Section 47 (6) of the Andhra Pradesh Shops & Establishments Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’). However, certain peculiarities are noticed in this case. The petitioner was in-charge of the finances as well as administration of the society. The President, who has assumed charge on 23.01.2005, states that the petitioner did not leave anything in the society and took away the entire records. Reference is made to a registered notice sent to the petitioner requiring him to produce the record. For all practical purposes, the society is handicapped from proceeding against the petitioner. An important aspect of the matter is about the age of superannuation of the petitioner. If what is stated by the respondents is true, the petitioner stood retired from service much before he was placed under suspension. These, however, are matters, which need to be determined finally after giving opportunity to the petitioner. On the one hand, the entitlement of the petitioner under Section 47(6) of the Act needs to be honoured and on the other, the interest of the society needs to be protected. This Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if the third respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the petitioner towards arrears of subsistence allowance, within four weeks from today. The petitioner, in turn, shall be under obligation to furnish the records including the proof of his date of birth, within two weeks from the date of receipt of the amount of Rs.20,000/- and depending upon the compliance of the petitioner with the above said requirement, the third respondent shall conclude the proceedings, within a period of four weeks from the date of furnishing the information. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that: (a) the third respondent-society shall pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the petitioner, within a period of four (4) weeks from today; (b) on his part, the petitioner shall return the record of the society in his possession including his service record and furnish proof of his date of birth, within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of Rs.20,000/-; (c) on receiving the record and the proof of date of birth, the third respondent-society shall conclude the proceedings, within four (4) weeks thereafter. The entitlement of the petitioner to receive further amount would depend upon the outcome of such proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:30.07.2008 Note: Issue cc in three days. kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}