SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(AP) 810

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. Manmadha Rao, J.
Pothuri Subba Raju, S/o Satyanarayana Raju - Petitioner
Versus
The State of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Cooperative Department – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.7248, 20068 and 20745 of 2020
Decided On : 30-08-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Bokka Satyanarayana Kamla
For the Respondent: AGP for Co-operation, Sri G. Rama Gopal, G V Shivaji

IMPORTANT POINT
Suspension of an employee under the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act must follow due process, including issuing a charge-sheet and conducting a proper inquiry.

Headnote:

Cooperative - Suspension - Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act 1954, Section 59 - The court interpreted Section 59 regarding the authority to suspend employees and the necessity of following due process, concluding that the suspension was illegal due to lack of jurisdiction and failure to issue a charge-sheet.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Chief Executive Officer of a cooperative society, was suspended without jurisdiction and due process under the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act and service rules, leading to multiple writ petitions challenging the legality of the suspension and subsequent actions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the suspension was illegal as it violated the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act and the service regulations, which required a charge-sheet and proper inquiry before suspension.

Issues: Whether the suspension of the petitioner was valid under the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act and the service rules, and whether the actions taken by the respondents were arbitrary and without jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the suspension was invalid as it did not comply with the procedural requirements set forth in the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act and the service regulations, emphasizing the need for a charge-sheet and proper inquiry.

Result: The court set aside the suspension and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits.

ORDER :

K. Manmadha Rao, J.

WP No.7248 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

    “….to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the proceeding in RC No 1/2019 dated 04 09 2019 suspended the petitioner by the 6th respondent and appointed the enquiry officer dated 14.10.2019 including consequential orders if any with out jurisdiction and contrary to the section 59 of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act 1954 and chapter 7 of Primary Agricultural Society Service Rules a part from the principles of natural Justice as illegal arbitrary and violative of article 14, 16, 21 and 311 Constitution of India and set a side the same and consequentially direct the respondents to reinstate him in to service as chief Executive officer by paying salary with all consequential benefits and pass…”

WP No.20068 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

    “….to to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the impugned notice seems to be the order dated 13.10.2020 of the 5th respondent directed the petitioner to try to join to some other society within 30 days otherwise he may removed from the duties in the 4th respondent society with out any jurisdiction and Power and contrary to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 28 08 2019 including Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act 1954 and Primary Agricultural Society Service Rules and also a part from the principles of natural Justice as illegal arbitrary and violative of article 14, 16, 21 and 311 Constitution of India and set a side the same and consequentially to suspend the impugned notice seems to be the order dated 13.10.2020 of the 5th respondent/ Chairperson of Three men Person In-charge Committee and pass…”

WP No.20745 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

    “….to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the in action on the part of the respondents herein not paying salaries with all consequential benefits since 04.09.2019 even though he was reinstate into service dated 30.06.2020 as per the orders in W P No 7248/2020 dated 16 03 2020 as illegal arbitrary and violative of the article 14, 16, 21 and 311 of constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to pay the salaries with all consequential benefits since 04.09.2019 forthwith in spite of the interim orders granted by the Hon’ble Court in W P No 7248/2020 dated 16.06.2020 and pass….”

2. As the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

3. Since the facts in all the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No.7248 of 2020 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, initially, the he was appointed as a salesman, later, he was promoted as a clerk and subsequently, he was promoted as Chief Executive Officer in the No.B708, Sri Raja Gopala Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, Kothalanka, Mummidiavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. Since the date of appointment, the petitioner was discharging his duties with utmost satisfaction of the superior authorities and he never committed any mistakes and dereliction of duties in his tenure and he is obeying the orders of superior every time. But, surprisingly, the petitioner was suspended on 04.09.2019 on certain allegations made under APCS Act Section 59 and service Rule chapter 4 by the 6th respondent without Jurisdiction and contrary to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent-District Cooperative Officer, Kakinada, dated 28.08.2019 and also stated in the suspension proceedings after two months the same may be reviewed by the committee to permit him to j

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top