IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1426 of 2009 SANJAY KUMAR S/O SHRI SADAN PRASAD SINGH THE MANAGING DIRECTOR/MEMBER SECRETARY, DISTRICT SAMBARG SAHYOG SAMITI, GOPALGANJ R/O VILL.- PURAINI, P.S. GIRIYAK, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BIHAR, PATNA 2. ATISH CHANDRA, THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BIHAR, PATNA 3. RAM NARESH PANDEY S/O LATE BIPINESHWAR PANDEY THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE OFFICER, GOPALGANJ 4. MANUJESHWAR SHARMA, THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SAHYOG SAMITI, GOPALGANJ 5. DINA NATH SINGH, THE BLOCK CO-OPERATIVE EXTENSION OFFICER, MANJHA BLOCK, GOPALGANJ 6. NAGMANI SAH S/O BACHCHA SAH CHAIRMAN BHAISAHI PURAINA PATHARA PACS, R/O VILL.- BHAISHI POLICE STATION MANJHAGARH, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ 7. VEER BAHADRA RAWAT S/O BASUDEO RAWAT R/O VILL. BHAISAHI, P.S. MANJHAGARH, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ With LPA No.1427 of 2009 RAM NARESH PANDEY S/O LATE BIPINESHWAR PANDEY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE OFFICER, GOPALGANJ, R/O VILL.- RAHUA, P.S. BIHARA, (PANCHGACHHIA), DISTT.- SAHARSA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE REGISTRAR, CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BIHAR, PATNA 2. ATISH CHANDRA, THE REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES BIHAR, PATNA 3. SANJAY KUMAR S/O SADAN PRASAD SINGH THEN MANAGING DIRECTOR/MEMBER SECRETARY, DISTRICT SAMBARG SAHYOG SAMITI GOPALGANJ 4. MANUJESWER SHARMA, THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SAHYOG SAMITI, GOPALGANJ 5. DINA NATH SINGH, THE BLOCK CO-OPERATIVE EXTENSION OFFICER, MANJHA BLOCK, GOPALGANJ 6. NAGMANI SAH S/O BACHCHA SAH THE CHAIRMAN BHAISAHI PURAINA PATHARA PACS R/O VILL.- BHAISAHI, P.S.- MANJHAGARH, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ 7. VEER BAHADRA RAWAT S/O BASUDEO RAWAT R/O VILL. BHAISAHI POLICE STATION MANJHAGARH, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ ----------- For the appellant :- Mr. P. K. Shahi, Advocate Mr. A. Rahman, Advocate For the State :- A.A.G-3 2 8 06.05.2011 These appeals have been filed against the orders dated 28.10.2009 passed by learned Single Judge in M.J..C. No. 1447 of 2007. The said M.J.C. was filed by the respondents alleging violation of the orders passed by this court on 10.07.2006 in C.W.J.C. No. 2699 of 2005. The said writ petition was filed by the respondent herein who is a paid Manager of Mungaraha Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society. It is the case of the appellant that he was instructed under order, bearing Memo No.111 dated 06.1.2004 to take charge of Munagaraha PACs and Bhaisahi Puraina Pathra PACs, irrespective of the direction issued by the District Co-operative Officer under order, bearing Memo No. 307 dated 17.05.2004 passed in Misc. Case No.3 of 2004. (Annexure-9 to the writ petition). The learned Single Judge having heard the matter directed the petitioner to file a representation either before the Managing Director, Respondent No.3 or before the District Co-operative Officer, Gopalganj, (Respondent No.4) who should ensure compliance of their own order dated 06.01.2004 and 3 17.05.2004, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the aforesaid representation. It appears that there was a partial compliance of the order on 14.09.2006 and after the M.J.C. was filed there was full compliance of the order on 28.08.2009. But, however, the learned Single Judge having heard the M.J.C. had passed order to initiate departmental proceeding against the appellant herein and one, Ram Naresh Pandy for not obeying the orders passed by this Court. Aggrieved by the said direction, the present appeals have been filed. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants have contended that admittedly there was delay in compliance of the direction issued by the District Co-operative Officer as the Chairman of the Munagaraha PACs and Bhaisahi Puraina Pathra PACs was not handed over the charge. The order of this Court was complied in its full entirety on 24 August 2009. A petition tendering unconditional apology has been filed before learned Single Judge. But, however, the learned Single Judge directed to take stern action against the then 4 Managing Director, Sri Sanjay Kumar and Sri Ram Naresh Pandey, District Co-operative Officer. Although, unconditional apology has been tendered, the learned Single Judge has directed the State to initiate a departmental proceeding against the then Managing Director and District Co-operative Officer in their own personal capacity. Aggrieved by the said order the appellants have filed this appeal. Learned counseld for the respondents argued that even though there is delay in implementing the order passed by the learned Single Judge, but the same was not intentional or willful. He has tendered unconditional apology for the delay in compliance of the order before the learned Single Judge. Having heard the matter at length, we are of the opinion that in spite of directives issued by the respondents the Chairman PAC has not complied the order. But, however, from the facts of the case, it would reveal that the appellants have made their best effort so that order of the learned Single Judge is complied with. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the direction of the 5 learned Single to the effect that the State should initiate disciplinary proceeding against the appellants herein should be set aside. Accordingly, order of the learned Single Judge is set aside and these appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above. Ashwini (T.Meena Kumari,J.) (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)