1. - These four Special Appeals are arising out of the common judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 11.9.2007 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petitions No.3887 and 3888 of 2006 filed by respondent - Jodhpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. (Later styled as "the Bank"), whereby while allowing the writ petitions, the orders passed by the Minister for the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Cooperative Societies dated 21.2.2006 under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001, hereinafter referred-to as "the Act of 2001", to hear the revision petitions filed by the appellant Vijay Kumar, were declared illegal and quashed and the respondent No.3, who was dismissed as Clerk cum Cashier cum Typist of the Bank vide orders dated 7.7.01 & 21.9.01 of both the writ petition and is also appellant in the aforesaid first two Special Appeals, was left with the liberty to avail the remedy for redressal of his grievance relating to the orders impugned in the revision petitions.

2. It is averred that the writ petitions of these Special Appeals were second in nature, as the earlier writ petitions being No.4848/04 and 4849/04 were disposed of on 17.11.05 by the learned Single Judge with the following order:

"Both these Writ Petitions involve identical controversy were listed in the Court for admission on 03.11.2004, on which date notices were ordered to be issued thereafter on 12.04.2005 when the writ petition No.4848 was listed in the Court it was stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the controversy which has been alleged in this writ petition is identical to S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2688/1998 - Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan decided on 07.05.2003 and D.B.Civil Special Appeal No.502/2003 Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan decided on 08.08.2003 . Therefore, the files of that writ petition and Special Appeal were ordered to be tagged with it and the writ petition was ordered to be listed alongwith the writ petition No.4849/2004.

Today learned counsel for the respondent also agree with the aforesaid submission that the controversy alleged in the present writ petitions is covered by the two aforesaid judgments and further submitted that these judgments have been affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 05.01.2005 which is reported in (2005) 2 SCC 334 Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan .

In that view of the matter for the same reasons these writ petitions are also disposed of granting/refusing the same reliefs as has been done in the aforesaid judgments."

3. When the earlier writ petitions were disposed-of, the reliance was placed on the decision of Ishwar Singh's case, as quoted in the above order, wherein it was held that the State Government was competent to revise the orders passed by the Registrar and Additional Registrar being officers subordinate. The Minister for the Department of Cooperatives, Government of Rajasthan, again started hearing of the above revision petitions and turned down the objections of the respondent - Bank, a Cooperative Bank registered under the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (now the Act of 2001) on 21.2.2006 vide Annex.8 of the writ petition, which reads as under:

"21.2.06

jktdh; vfHkHkk"kd mifLFkr A izkFkhZ vf/koDrk ,oa vizkFkhZ vf/koDrk mifLFkr A vizkFkhZ cSad vf/koDrk us mPp U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; ds ckn Hkh iqu% izdj.k dh xzkgrk ij iz'u fd;k A

U;k;ky; us izdj.k dks xzkg; ekurs gq, vizkFkhZ cSad dh vkifr fujLr dh xbZ A izdj.k xq.kkoxq.k ds vk/kkj ij lquokbZ gsrq vxyh rkjh[k is'kh 7-3-06 fu;r dh xbZ A cSad ds eq[; dk;Zdkjh dks O;fDrxr mifLFkfr ls NwV nh xbZ A

gLrk{kj

,l-Mh-@&

enu fnykoj**

4. Both these orders of the Minister were challenged in the alleged second Writ Petitions, which were disposed-of by the impugned judgment dated 11.9.07 as referred-to above. Against this judgment, these two Special Appeals have been filed by the Delinquent Vijay Kumar and remaining two Special Appeals by the respondent State. The necessity of filing two writ petit