1. A short issue in this writ application is with regard to the validity of memo no. 585, dated 16.12.2008, issued by the Managing Director of the Samastipur, Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. by which order, the services of the petitioner have been terminated/discontinued with immediate effect.

2. Counter affidavits have been filed by the respondent-State and the Bank and rejoinders thereto.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, with their consent, this writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself.

4. Petitioners father was in service of the said Bank. He died in harness on 5.6.2003. He was Senior Accountant in the Bank. In conformity with Rule 38 of the Central Co-operative Bank Service Rules , as framed by the State Government and enforced under Section 66B of the Bank Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 as also the Circular of the State Government dated 11.5.2001 (Annexure-1) of the State Government in the department of Co-operative, the matter of compassionate appointment of the petitioner was take up in the meeting of the Committee for Compassionate Appointment of the respondent-Bank on 8.1.2004, as constituted by the State Government. It accepted the request for compassionate appointment of the petitioner and recommended the same. Thereafter, the Executive Committee of the Bank considered the same on 25.1.2004 and permitted the Managing Director to make appointment and issue appointment letter accordingly. Accordingly on 19.7.2004, the Managing Director of the repondent-Bank issued appointment letter to the petitioner and pursuant thereto he joined. These actions of the Managing Director were then placed before the Board of Director of the Bank and were approved. While so approving the same, the Board of Director opined that salary would be paid after approval of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Govt, of Bihar. While the matter was pending consideration and the petitioner was not being paid, he approached this High Court by filing CWJC No. 11720 of 2005. While the writ petition was pending, it appears that the Chairman of the Bank endorsed upon the Attendance Register that the petitioners services were dispensed with and did not permit him to continue. When the writ petition was already pending, petitioner filed I.A. No. 3252/07 in the said writ petition bringing these facts on record and challenging the action of the Chairman. The writ petition was heard and ultimately allowed by judgment and order dated 6.8.2007. The order of the Chairman, preventing the petitioner from working, was set aside. This Court also held that before any action could be taken against the petitioner any communication with regard to petitioner must be disclosed to the petitioner. In response thereto, by letter dated 10.10.08, petitioner was informed that in view of the decision of the Board of Director by which his appointment was approved and for payment of his salary, communication was made to the Registar, Co-operative Societies. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies by his letter dated 8.12.2004 disapproved the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. The petitioner was thus asked to explain why his services be not terminated. Petitioner filed his reply alongwith enclosures clearly stating that there was no illegality committed in his appointment on compasionate ground as in the said show cause a reference has been made to Section 11(1) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Petitioner also enclosed therewith a notification of the Reserve Bank of India, dated 2nd June, 2000 by which the Reserve Bank of India has declared that provision of Rule 11(1) of the Banking Regulation Act would not apply to the respondent- Bank upto 31st March, 2004. As would be seen from the facts above, petitioners appointment was recommended much before 31st March, 2004 when admittedly and undisputedly the provision of Section 11(1) of the Act was not applicable. Be that as it may, the matter was then placed before the