ORDER :

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari in calling the records by declaring the action, things and deeds of Respondents in dismissing the Petitioner from the post of C.E.O. of 7th Respondent by Termination Proceedings dated 09.01.2019 issued by 7th Respondent, which are illegal, irregular, arbitrary, contra to the provisions of A.P. Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 and its Rules and against to the Service Regulations of the Employees of District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., and also in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 311 of Constitution of India, consequently set aside the Termination Proceedings dated 09.01.2019 by reinstating the Petitioner into service with all benefits including back wages and to pass such other orders”.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner joined as Attender in the year 1992 in Dandikuppam, Santhipuram, P.A.C.S. Limited and thereafter, he was promoted as Salesman/Accountant in the year 2005. After some time, the Dandikuppam, P.A.C.S. Limited was merged in Santhipuram, P.A.C.S. Limited and thereafter the petitioner temporarily worked as Chief Executive Officer from 12.07.2012 to 30.06.2013. On 23.06.2016, he was promoted as C.E.O. and while discharging his duties as C.E.O., a show-cause notice dated 06.04.2018 was served on the petitioner by the 7th respondent asking him to submit his explanation in respect of the irregularities found in the Audit Report for the year 2016-17 vide letter dated 16.03.2018 of Deputy Divisional Co-operative Officer. In the said show-cause notice, 15 allegations have been made against the petitioner contending that there was misappropriation of funds of Santhipuram P.A.C.S. Limited. In response to the said show-cause notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 16.04.2018, explaining that the said differences were carried forward since 10 to 15 years and it was not done during the petitioner’s tenure and the Societies were computerized in the year 2016-17 and after verifying the Society records, the said difference has been found in respect of items 1 to 8, for which, the petitioner was not responsible and the truth would come out if the earlier C.E.Os are enquired.

3. In his explanation, the petitioner further submitted that in respect of long term loans and Janatha loans, they were granted only after obtaining permission from the President since last ten years, and if any discrepancy arises, for which the earlier C.E.Os would be responsible but not the petitioner. In reply to 10th allegation, the petitioner submitted that the temporary receipts have been issued on the oral instructions of the President as the said practice was being continued since several years and if the enquiry is conducted through the Co-operative Department, the total information would come out. In respect of items 11 to 15 of the show-cause notice, if the Society records are verified for the last 10 to 15 years, the actual position would be known, since there was a complaint to the officials of the D.C.C. Bank even five years back, for which, no action was initiated. Misappropriation of funds in respect of conduct of business of Groundnut, Pulses and Fertilizers is that if proper enquiry is conducted by the Deputy Divisional Co-operative Society Officer, Madanapalli, the truth would be known. One of the points raised in the show-cause notice is also about the irregularities in issuing gold loans, wherein it is found that an amount of Rs.16,86,952/- was not brought to the cash book and loan ledger and misappropriated of funds of the 7th respondent.

4. It was further alleged that four ornamental packets in respect of four loans were missing shortfall collection of interest to a tune of Rs.27,142/- and therefore, the petitioner was informed that why action should not be initiated against him for recove