IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3473 of 2004 Bikram Bahadur Mehta, son of Shri Bhuplal Prasad Mehta, resident of village & P.O. Nirmali, P.S. Pipra, District- Supaul …………………… Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar, Patna 3. The Madhepura-Supaul Central Co-operative bank Ltd. through the District Magistrate-cum-Liquidator, Mahdepura 4. District Co-operative Officer-cum-Assistant Liquidator, Madhepura-Supaul Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Madhepura ……………… Respondents ----------- For the petitioner: M/S S.Rahman and A.K.Prasad, Advocates For Resp. No. 3 & 4: Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate. ----------- 6. 13.5.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. No one appears for the State. The petitioner is an employee of the erstwhile Madhepura-Supaul Central Co-operative Bank Limited which has been directed to be liquidated pursuant to the cancellation of its licence by the Reserve Bank of India. He has come to this Court for payment of salary since June, 2002 till December, 2003 along with interest and other dues as also compensation for termination of his job or in the alternative to adjust/absorb his services in any other co-operative 2 Bank or organization after formulating a scheme. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4. It is pointed out therein that the decision to liquidate the Bank was taken on 11.6.2003 by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar and the District Magistrate, Madhepura has been appointed as Liquidator and the District Co- operative officer, Madhepura as Assistant Liquidator of the Bank. It is also submitted that the Provident Fund amount and the amount made available by the General Insurance Company has already been paid to 117 out of 119 employees and the pre-liquidation dues minus gratuity has also been paid to all the employees except the charged employees till 31.1.2011. It is further stated that steps are being taken in the liquidation process and it is expected to conclude in the coming three years. So far as the conclusion of the liquidation proceeding is concerned, Rule 64(5) of the Bihar Co- operative Societies Rules, 1959 provides that the Registrar may when appointing the liquidator, prescribe the period within which the liquidation proceedings are to close and may extend this period from time to time. 3 It appears from the submissions of learned counsels for the parties that no such period has been prescribed by the Registrar and the liquidation is proceeding in lackadaisical manner. The Registrar, when exercising his power to direct liquidation, is expected to fix the time-frame within which the liquidation proceedings are to be closed so that the said proceedings are treated with the seriousness which they deserve and if the same are not concluded within the said period, he is required to extend the same from time to time not in a mechanical manner but after applying his mind to the fact situation and ensuring that within the extended period the liquidation proceedings are completed. It need not be emphasized that the Registrar can not only appoint a person as liquidator but he may even change the liquidator from time to time specially if he finds that the liquidator is not proceeding expeditiously in the matter as is required of him. Let the petitioner approach the Registrar in this regard who is directed to prescribe a time-frame within which the liquidation proceedings may conclude and to ensure that it is done within the said time-frame 4 or any extension that is sought is with seriousness so as to conclude the same within the extended period. With regard to any other dues of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to approach the liquidator himself who shall consider and dispose of his claims in accordance with law. So far as the question of adjustment/absorption of the services of the petitioner in any other co-operative Bank or organization is concerned, learned counsel refers to an order dated 27.4.2007 passed in CWJC no. 5862/2004 and its analogous case in which note has been taken of the fact that efforts are on to accommodate employees of the bank in question and some steps in this regard have already been taken. In the said order this Court had already directed the State Government that it is expected to take appropriate steps in the matter and complete the entire exercise within a year. Despite passage of more than 4 years thereafter it does not appear that the same has been done. Let the State take up the matter with the seriousness with which any such scheme must have been formulated earlier. 5 The writ application is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations and directions. S.Pandey ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)