THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. Nos. 13059, 17701, 18750, 18768,19020 and 19259 of 2001 COMMON ORDER: In all these writ petitions, common questions of law and fact arise for consideration, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. It appears, petitioners are all working as Paid Secretaries and discharging the functions of Chief Executives of the respective Societies. Their grievance is that they are not given treatment on par with other Secretaries who are appointed under ‘Half a million Job Scheme’ though the qualifications, nature of duties, functions etc. are one and the same, except the nature of appointment. The post of Secretary, as per the Service Regulations, shall be filled up by two methods, 1) by way of direct recruitment and 2) by way of promotion of in-service employees. While that being so, the cadre of existing secretaries as on 1.9.1985 was abolished and all the Secretaries, whose cadre was so abolished and/or de-categorized, were posted as Permanent Secretaries in the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. Their salary and nature of duties are one and the same. No distinction is made between these two categories of Secretaries by the Rules. 1st respondent also issued circular instructions in Memo Rc.No.49920/86- C2B dated 30.8.1986 and another one dated 4.7.1989 with the following directions: i) “The service benefits as are available to the decaderised secretaries have been applied to the secretaries appointed by managements also. ii) The Secretaries may also be treated on par with decaderised secretaries and allotted to those societies which are provided with secretaries working as such. iii) The allotment of these secretaries be taken up by following the procedure obtaining with the allotment of decaderised secretaries as provided under Rule 72 of A.P.C.S. Rules after finally completing the allotment of decaderised secretaries”. As per the above said orders, the Secretaries appointed by the management of the Society are also eligible for service benefits available to the decaderised secretaries. Apart from that, 1st respondent, having been empowered under the A.P.C.S. Act, vide Proc. Rc.No.621/86 C2(B) dated 7.8.86 issued instructions to all the concerned to the effect that the Secretaries appointed by the Societies are also regulated by the service conditions of the employees of the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies and the District Collectors were requested to allot the decaderised secretaries only to the PACs including LSCS Rural Banks, which were earlier provided with the cadre secretaries. It appears, four persons, namely, 1) M.V.S. Narasimha Sastry, 2) D. Ganga Raju, 3) K.V.V.R. Trimurthulu and 4) P. Adinarayana Murthy were similarly promoted to the post of Secretary and when they were not placed in the panel of decaderised secretaries, they approached this Court by filing W.P. 996 of 1997 and batch and upon the directions issued by this Court, they were now included in the panel of Paid Secretaries in the junior-most places and, in fact, 2nd respondent has specifically issued Proceedings Rc.No.3770/96A dated 18.6.1999 directing that the said persons included in the panel of Paid Secretaries have to be paid salary as per the Government Memo dated 14.10.1991 and they should be allowed to avail all the benefis awarded in respect of decaderised secretaries. Further, the District Cooperative Central Bank issued proceedings dated 22.6.1999 including them in the panel of paid secretaries. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the petitioners are situated in the same position as that of the above four individuals, they have not been given same treatment and benefit of inclusion in the panel of Paid Secretaries for further benefits just for the reason that they have not approached this Court. Otherwise, there was no variation between petitioners and the said four individuals. This kind of discrimination on the part of respondents is liable to be declared as highly arbitrary and illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further, the Board Secretaries, in view of the proceedings issued in their favour, were included in the panel along with the Paid Secretaries and they have been given benefits and they are also being considered for selection to the post of Category V employees of D.C.C. Bank. Though the petitioners are similarly situated, they have been denied justice for the reason that they have not approached this Court. It is the contention of the petitioners that they are seniors to that of the Board Secretaries included in the panel along with Paid Secretaries and if they are considered ignoring the petitioners, petitioners will be loosing opportunity of getting promotion or selection to the post of Category V, while their juniors who are included in the panel would be benefited and they would suffer irreparable loss and injury. Hence, these writ petitions. In the counter filed by respondents, brief history of the Secretaries of the Society was indicated. It is stated that the Societies have Secretaries who act as Chief Executive of the Society. They were appointed by a committee constituted under Section 116-A of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, (for short, ‘the Act’) in the cadre of Secretaries to the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies under a special scheme “Half a Million Jobs Programme of the Government of India” during the year 1973-74. However, the common cadre of Secretaries was abolished under Section 116-AA of the Act with effect from 25.4.1985 and decaderised secretaries are to be allotted as per the procedure stipulated under Rule 72 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short, ‘the Rules’). Petitioners have been appointed by the Management to the cadre of Clerk in the service of the Society and later promoted to the cadre of Secretary under Special Byelaw No.9 of the Special Byelaws governing the service conditions of employees of the Society. There is no approved staffing pattern for respondent-societies under Section 116C of the Act. Therefore, petitioners cannot be promoted to the cadre of Secretary in the absence of vacancy in the post of Secretary. Further, the two categories of Secretaries cannot be equated under the provisions of the Act. The decaderised Secretaries can be allotted to another Society under Rule 72 of the Rules but, whereas, the employees of the Society promoted to the cadre of Secretary cannot be allotted to other Society under Rule 72 of the Rules. Instructions were issued by 1st respondent in Circular Memo Rc.No.49920/86-C2B dated 30.8.1986 for allotment of Secretaries who were recruited as per cadre regulations and other rules governing direct recruitment. These Secretaries were appointed by the cadre authority consequent on the lifting of ban imposed on appointment of Paid Secretaries in the vacancies of reorganized Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies, in consideration of various representations from Cooperative Central Banks and Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. They have no application to the Secretaries appointed by promotion to the post of Secretary by the management of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. Vide Circular Memo Rc.No.621/86 Cr2(B) dated 7.8.1986, 1st respondent issued instructions for allotment of decaderised Secretaries only among the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies, Large Sized Cooperative Societies, Cooperative Rural Banks which were earlier provided with cadre Secretaries. There is no provision for allotment of Secretaries appointed by promotion to the post of Secretary, by the management of the Society. However, 2nd respondent, vide Lr.Rc.No.2491/95A dated 26.4.1995 requested 1st respondent to consider representation of four employees referred to above and accord necessary permission to include their names in the list of regular Secretaries in the district as the final allotment of the Paid Secretaries was not done in the district due to the stay orders issued by this Court in WPMP No. 26356 of 1995 in W.P. No. 26353 of 1995 dated 25.4.1996. The said four employees were considered on humanitarian grounds for allotment as provided under Rule 72 of the Rules and in any case the interests of the decaderised Secretaries shall not be effected. Empanelling the four employees as referred above has been cancelled vide proceedings dated 6.1.1997 of 4th respondent and they have been continued in the panel as per the orders dated 12.4.1999 of this Court in W.P. No. 1312 of 1997. However, on reorganization of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies and formation of 5673 viable societies in the State, a fresh look has been given to the service conditions of the Paid Secretaries of the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. It was decided to offer a minimum monthly salary of Rs.250/- to each of the Paid Secretary. In order to guarantee the payment of monthly salary to the Paid Secretary, the cadre fund has been constituted at the District and the State level, for which contribution has been fixed to be made by the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies, the District Cooperative Central Banks and the State Cooperative Bank. Under the Scheme, the apex Bank has to contribute 1/4th% out of its margin, Cooperative Central Bank 1/4th% of the margin and Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies 1% of their margin to the cadre fund under ST (Agril.) loans and the net deficit if any is to be shared by the State Cooperative Bank and the Government, on 50:50 basis. The Paid Secretaries appointed under the scheme cannot be equated with other employees of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. Thus, petitioners are not entitled for inclusion in the panel of Paid Secretaries (decaderised Secretaries as per the instructions of 1st respondent). 1st respondent i.e. the Commissioner for Cooperation & Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in Lr.Rc.No.28530/96K2 dated 8.1.1997 clearly instructed that the Secretaries appointed by the Board of Management of PACS cannot be included in the panel of Paid Secretaries (decaderised Secretaries), which is a district cadre governed under Section 116A, which stands abolished now. Further, G.O.Ms.No. 314 dated 26.12.2000 issued by the State Government was upheld in W.A. No. 424 of 2001 dated 16.10.2001 by this Court. The said G.O. was issued canceling the Memo No. 5661 dated 14.10.1991 which was issued treating the Paid Secretaries on par with 5th category employees of the District Cooperative Central Bank. In view of the said judgment, the Paid Secretaries, much less the Board Secretaries are not entitled for eligibility under Memo No. 5661 dated 14.10.1991 which is cancelled in G.O.Ms.No. 314 dated 26.12.2000. As the matter stood thus, the A.P. State Cooperative Societies Secretaries and Employees Union, East Godavari District represented by its General Secretary G.R.K.V. Chowdary has filed W.P. No. 19259 of 2001 seeking a direction against the Government of A.P. and the respondents herein not to include the names of Board Secretaries in the panel of Secretaries, East Godavari besides declaring inclusion of names as contrary to the procedure envisaged under the Special Byelaws issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Rule 72 (3) of the Rules. In WPMP No. 24227 of 2001 in W.P. No. 19259 of 2001, this Court has granted status quo as on that day vide orders dated 17.9.2001 and the said interim orders are subsisting. In view of the said orders, the names of petitioners cannot be considered for inclusion in the panel of Secretaries. Heard both sides. The sum and substance of the grievance of petitioners appears to be that they are all Promotees/Paid Secretaries of respondent-Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies and they are not being treated on par with the Cadre Secretaries of other societies. Similar question arose for consideration earlier before this Court in A.P. State Cooperative Societies Secretaries and Employees Association, Nizamabad Unit v. State of A.P., Food and Agriculture (Dept. of Coop. Societies) Dept. and others[1]. The relevant portions of the said judgment are as below: “3. It is stated that the Paid Secretaries were appointed on full time basis to manage the affairs and maintain the accounts of Primary Agricultural Co-operative Societies. The Registrar of Co- operative Societies in exercise of powers under Section 116-A of the Act in 1973 has constituted a common cadre to the Secretaries of the Societies with a view to provide qualified Secretaries and they were trained to discharge the functions of Chief Executives of PACS. Originally, they were paid a consolidated sum of Rs.150/- towards their remuneration. 4. The Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Credit Societies Paid Secretaries (Common Cadre) Regulations were framed under Section 116-A of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and by proceedings dated 1-1-1980 all the Paid Secretaries of the PACS were placed in the time scale of Rs. 250-420 with a fixed Dearness Allowance, which was equivalent to Supervisors of Cadre V of the District Co-operative Central Banks. The Government of Andhra Pradesh promulgated the A.P. Co-operative Societies (2nd and 3rd Amendments) Ordinance, 1985 amending Section 116-AA of the Cooperative Societies Act decaderising the Paid Secretaries. The grievance of the appellant is that when the Paid Secretaries were being allotted to the Societies, the Presidents of the Societies are refusing to admit them on the ground that there is no obligation on their part to admit the Secretaries who are allotted under Section 116-AA of the Act. 7. Section 116-AA of the Act provides for abolition of centralised services for certain categories of employees, which reads: "The common cadre for all categories of employees other than those specified in Section 116-A, constituted before the commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Act, 1985 and existing at such commencement shall stand abolished with effect on and from the commencement, and upon such abolition, it shall be lawful for the Registrar, to allot, subject to such rules as may be made in this behalf, the employees included in the cadre so abolished to such Primary Agricultural Credit Societies as he may deem fit: Provided that until they are allotted as aforesaid they shall continue in the posts in which they are working at the commencement of the said Act." 8. Section 116-C of the Act, which deals with the staffing pattern of the societies, reads thus: "(1) A society shall have power to fix the staffing pattern, qualification, pay scales and other allowances for its employees with the prior approval of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies; (2) No appointment or removal of a Chief Executive by whatever name called of any society, or class of societies as may be prescribed which are in receipt of financial aid from the Government, shall be made without the prior approval of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies." 9. The amendment thereto brought in by Act 22 of 2001 to Section 116-C reads thus: In Section 116-C of the Principal Act, for Sub- section (1), the following sub-section shall be substituted, namely:- (1) A society shall have power to fix the staffing pattern, qualifications, pay scales and other allowances of its employees with the prior approval of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies subject to the condition that expenditure towards pay and allowances of the employees shall not exceed two per cent of the working capital or thirty per cent of the gross profit, in terms of actuals in a year whichever is less. 10. The structure of the Paid Secretaries has come into existence in pursuance of G.O. Ms. No. 390, 12-7-1973 whereby and whereunder a scheme for appointment of Paid Secretaries in Co- operative Agricultural Credit Societies was contemplated providing for appointment of Paid Secretary for each society on a consolidated pay of Rs. 150/-per month and the Registrar of Co- operative Societies was requested to take immediate steps to implement the said scheme during 1973-74. In 1964 the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Credit Societies Paid Secretaries (Common Cadre) Regulations were framed under Section 116 (A)(1) of the Act. Regulation 2(iii) thereof defines "Paid Secretary" to mean any person appointed by the specified authority of the Appointment Committee to work as Secretary, Manager or by any other designation, carrying out the functions of Chief Executive in any of the societies specified. 10-A. The Government is empowered to give directions to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 131 of the Act, which is in the following terms: "(1) The Government may generally or in any particular matter under this Act, issue such orders and directions as they may consider necessary to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and thereupon he shall give effect to such orders or directions and shall report to the Government in due course the result thereof. (2) In any case, in which a direction has been given under Sub-section (1), the Government may call for and examine the record of the proceedings of the Registrar and pass such orders in the case as they may think fit: Provided that before passing any order under this sub-section, the person likely to be affected by such order shall be given an opportunity of making his representation." 11. Rule 72 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964 provides for guidelines in regard to allotment of decadarised Secretaries to the Societies. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 72, which is relevant, reads thus: "(a) The Secretary, on allotment to a Society, shall be deemed to be the employee of that society and shall be entitled to receive pay and allowances as may be fixed from the funds of the said society. (b) The service condition of the Secretaries working in the societies shall be governed by such service regulations as may be framed by the Registrar for adoption by the Societies." 20. The conditions of service of different persons working under different Co-operative Societies may vary. Each Cooperative Society is entitled to lay down its own service conditions. The only statutory requirement is that same must be approved by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in terms of Rule 72 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules. Only because, there is a possibility of different Co- operative Societies fixing different remunerations for their Paid Secretaries in terms of Section 116- AA, it would not attract Article 14 of the Constitution. Each Co-operative Society must fix its staffing pattern and also fix the remuneration payable to employees in such a manner so that the provisions of Article 116-C are not violated. The employees of each Co-operative Society would form a different class and in that view of the matter in our opinion, even no discrimination can be alleged, nor Article 14 of the Constitution would be violated thereby”. Thus, it is clear that the common cadre created in 1978 was abolished in the year 1985. During the subsistence of common cadre, the Secretaries who are directly appointed and the promotees in PACS etc., were treated on par with each other and the requirements of their eligibility as well as other service conditions were one and the same. However, in view of financial crisis and in view of the fact that many of the Societies were not able to meet the salaries of the Secretaries, the abolition of common cadre was recommended in the year 1985, under Section 116-AA of the Act. At that point of time, it was felt that the direct recruitees would be sent to District Cooperative Banks, A.P. State Cooperative Banks and Large Sized Cooperative Societies and other promotees would remain in the PACS as Paid Secretaries/Chief Executives. Now, the question is whether the petitioners are entitled for promotion, salary etc. on par with the cadre Secretaries of District Cooperative Central Banks, A.P. State Cooperative Banks and other Large Sized Cooperative Societies. In fact, the very arrangement made after abolition of common cadre in the year 1985 is to see that there will not be any financial problem in meeting the expenditure of Secretaries and the cadre strength as fixed by each Society by itself. However, they were all governed by the service conditions made under Rule 72 (3)(b) of the Rules. The guidelines issued by the Commissioner of Cooperation-cum-Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Rule 72 have the statutory force and binding effect on employees of all the Societies. Therefore, from time to time the Commissioner of Cooperation-cum-Registrar of Cooperative Societies has been issuing instructions clarifying the position of Cadre Secretaries and Paid Secretaries of PACS i.e. direct recruitee Cadre Secretaries and promotee Paid Secretaries. The Rules are statutory in nature and as per Rule 72 of the Rules, unless and until those rules are set aside or altered or modified, petitioners cannot claim their status on par with direct recruitee Cadre Secretaries of other Societies. It appears, on re- organization of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies and formation of 5673 viable Societies in the State, a fresh look has been given to the service conditions of Paid Secretaries of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Societies. The Paid Secretaries appointed under ‘Half a million Jobs Programme’ cannot be clubbed with other employees of PACS. The Secretaries appointed by the Board of Management of PACS cannot be included in the panel of Paid Secretaries (decaderized Secretaries), which is a District Cadre, governed under Section 116-A, which stands abolished. In fact, 1st respondent issued instructions in his Letter No.28530/96/K2 dated 8.1.1997 to say that other Secretaries should not be included in the panel of Paid Secretaries who were appointed under Half a million Jobs Scheme and it is a separate cadre, which is now abolished. They have been allotted to various PACS as per the procedure laid down in Rule 72 of the Rules. The guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No. 67 dated 20.2.2009 were further clarified in G.O.Rt.No. 244 dated 18.2.2010, which are statutory in nature, which state that the DCCBs have been given full autonomy in the matter of personnel policy, staffing, recruitment, posting and compensation to staff, subject to the guidelines issued by RBI/NABARD. Therefore, it is not appropriate for the Government to issue any orders/directions to the DCCBs with regard to pay-scales of their employees. The scale of pay applicable to Special Category Assistants was considered from time to time in relation with the scale of pay of Category V employees of DCCBs and since they form part of the DCCB employees, it is for the DCCBs to take appropriate action to give revised pay scale and all other benefits like Gratuity, Encashment of EL etc., to Special Category Assistants on par/equate with Category V employees of DCCBs with effect from 1.3.2009 or from the day the decaderised paid secretaries joined the respective DCCBs as Special Category Assistants, whichever is applicable, subject to the guidelines issued by NABARD in its letter No. NB 100.IDO Coop.ST (P)/1872N-77/2009-10, dt.31.12.2009. Further, petitioners were all appointed as Secretaries on promotion by the management of the Society. Therefore, their appointment cannot be equalized with the de-caderised Paid Secretaries. Therefore, petitioners are not eligible to be reverted back to the DCCB, Kakinada to absorb as Special Category Assistant as in the case of de-caderised paid sectaries, in terms of Government Orders in G.O.Ms.No.67 A&C Dept., dated 20.2.2009. Every Society is under obligation to comply with such lawful directions of the Registrar issued from time to time and the managing committee of the Society is the appointing authority under the bye-laws. From the above, it is clear that though at one point of time i.e. from the date of creation of common cadre till abolition of common cadre in the year 1985 they traveled together, thereafter petitioners were treated separately and their service conditions are purely governed by the byelaws of the respective Societies. The Cadre Secretaries stand apart from the petitioners. Therefore, petitioners cannot compare themselves with that of the Cadre Secretaries and claim all the benefits on par with them. For all the above reasons, all these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date:5-10-2010. MVB. [1] 2002 (4) ALT 272 (D.B).