Radheshyam Ambade v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3089 of 2019

1. Radheshyam Ambade S/o Shri Bahadurlal Ambade Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Dulagudra Post Office Chilhati, Tahsil Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co - Operative Affairs Mahanadi, Bhawan Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Registrar Co- Operative Societies Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Deputy Registrar Co- Operative Societies Kabeerdham Chhattisgarh

4. District Co Operative Central Bank Ltd. Through The Chief Executive Officer, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate For State :

Ms. Astha Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/04/2019 1.

The petitioner in the present Writ Petition seeking for direction to the Respondent No. 04 Bank to give joining to the petitioner in the light of the order of removal of service of the petitioner dated 29.04.2017, having been stayed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society Respondent No. 03 in a proceeding under Section 55 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act. According to the petitioner, inspite of the fact that the Respondent No. 03 had stayed the effect and operation of the removal of service order dated 29.04.2017 vide his Order dated 06.04.2018 till date Respondent No. 4 has not complied with the same

and has not granted joining to the petitioner, which has led to the filing of the present Writ Petition.

2.

Having heard the Counsel for the petitioner, what is clearly revealed is that against the Order of removal from service, the petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy available to him under the Co-operative Societies Act and the matter is also ceased by the Respondent No. 03 and it appears that the Respondent No. 03 has also passed the Order in favour of the petitioner on 06.04.2018 staying the effect and operation of the Order of removal from service dated 29.04.2017. 3.

Given the fact, that the matter is already ceased with/by the statutory authority and has also passed the said Order in favour of the petitioner, this Court in exercise of its extra-ordinary powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition.

4.

At this juncture, rather ends of justice would meet, if the Respondent No. 03 is directed to ensure that the proceedings initiated by the petitioner is concluded and decided at the earliest, preferably within four months from the next date the matter is fixed for hearing before the Deputy Registrar i.e. Respondent No. 03.

5.

Needless to mention that the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Respondent No. 03 for the implementation of the Order dated 06.04.2018 and the petitioner would also be at liberty to approach the Respondent No. 03 for any consequential relief, pursuant to the interim relief granted on 06.04.2018.

6.

With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed off. Sd/--/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul