1. This writ petition is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 21.12.1999 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nashik Division, Nashik in appeal No. 3 of 1998.

Background facts of the case are as under:-

2. The petitioner herein is a District Supervision Co-operative Society Limited registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The respondent No.2 is ex-employee of the petitioner society. The respondent was employee as a Secretary and he was working at Vangaon, Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Society Limited, Tq. Edlabad. It is the case of the petitioner that during the tenure of the Secretary, the respondent had committed several acts of misappropriation and also there was dereliction of duties, therefore, departmental enquiry was held against the respondent by appointing enquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer by his report dated 10.11.1991 held the respondent guilty of following charges;-

1. Submitting fraudulent certificates signed by the Chairman

2. Submitting explanation at a late stage

3. Not providing record for the audit

4. Dereliction of duties.

5. Not reporting on duties

6. Not handing over the charge and records

7. Mis-appropriation of Rs.5,000/-

8. Mis-appropriation of Rs.2,000/-

9. Mis-appropriation of Rs.1,000/-

10. Not handing over the charge fully

11. Using fraudulent receipt books

After receipt of report, the Inquiry Officer by order dated 8.5.1998 services of the respondent were terminated by the petitioner society. The petitioner herein filed appeal No. 3 of 1998 before the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nashik. Subsequently the audit of the said society has taken place and it was noticed that the petitioner had misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,80,898/-. The respondent is also facing criminal prosecution for misappropriation before the learned J.M.F.C. Pachora.

The Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nashik allowed the appeal filed by the respondent by order dated 8.5.1998. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the charges which were levelled against the respondent were very serious in nature. The findings of the enquiry Officer are based upon the documentary and oral evidence. The respondent was guilty of misappropriation and in these circumstances, keeping him in service was prejudicial to the interest of the society. The respondent employee had to deal with ill literate farmers in his capacity as Secretary of multi purpose Co-operative Society. In view of this the punishment of termination was appropriate. It is further submitted that the Divisional Joint Registrar had no jurisdiction to interfere with the findings of the fact to consider the adequacy of evidence, the Divisional Joint Registrar had also no jurisdiction to interfere with the punishment which was proportionate to the charges proved. The learned counsel further submitted that the order passed in appeal by the Divisional Joint Registrar is without taking into consideration the additional charges as framed against the respondent, therefore, counsel for the petitioner would submit that the view taken by the appellate authority cannot be said to be reasonable view since entire material was not taken into consideration while allowing the appeal filed by the respondent. Learned counsel further submitted that even the charge Nos. 1 to 6 were very serious in nature. Learned counsel submitted that there was specific charge of misappropriation of the amount, however, the appellate authority in stead of going in to the details, has superficially concluded that the respondent was not guilty of those charges. Learned counsel further submitted that when there are serious charges of the misappropriation the appellate authority should have passed necessary orders in appeal only after taking into consideration all charges including the additional charges and also enquiry report. Learned counsel furt