THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 1990 OF 2006 O R D E R: The petitioner was employed as a Supervisor, in the erstwhile District Cooperative Marketing Society, Nalgonda, in the year 1974. Subsequently, he was promoted as Business Manager, in the year 1983. The proceedings for liquidation of the said society were initiated, in the year 1984, and ultimately, an order of liquidation was passed on 24.4.1987. Petitioner states that all the employees of the society have either been absorbed in other services, or were extended monetary benefit, whereas, he was continued in service, to help and assist the Liquidator. It is stated that though he was paid a sum of Rs.2,28,000/-, towards salary, up to some period, the respondents, and in particular, the Liquidator did not pay the salary for the rest of his service. The petitioner contends that his application for extension of the benefit of Voluntary Retirement Scheme was also not considered, though it was recommended by several authorities in the department. The 4th respondent filed a counter affidavit, stating that with the liquidation of the society, the petitioner does not have any legal right. He stated that the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month as honorarium, for the service rendered by him subsequent to the liquidation, and thereafter, no amount was paid, since no services were rendered by the petitioner. It is urged that the benefit of Voluntary Retirement Scheme cannot be conferred upon the employees of the society, since it has already been liquidated, and no employees were found surplus. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Cooperation. Once a society formed under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act is liquidated, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, it ceases to exist in law. The manner, in which the employees of the society so liquidated are to be dealt with, has to be considered in the liquidation proceedings themselves. The petitioner states that even while the liquidation proceedings were in progress, the employees of the society were absorbed in various organizations. It is not known as to why the petitioner did not choose such a course. With the liquidation of the society, it ceases to have in existence in law, and when the employer is no more in existence, the petitioner cannot claim that he continues to be in employment. Further, Voluntary Retirement Scheme, which is approved by the Government, is only in respect of such organizations, that are having excess of staff. At any rate, the scheme can be enforced only in an organization, which is in existence and not the one, which is liquidated, or wound up. It is only the 4th respondent that is said to have availed the service of the petitioner, not as an employee of the liquidated society, but in a different capacity. For the services so extracted from the petitioner, the 4th respondent has already paid a sum of Rs.2,28,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be extended any relief, at this stage. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ 18th June 2008 PAN