Authority for imposing punitive measures within cooperative societies must comply with the latest statutory regulations.

1. Petitioner No. 1 is the Central Co - operative Bank Ltd., Raisen whereas petitioner No. 2 is Gramin Sewa Sahkari Samiti, Bankhedi. Respondent No. 4 Moolchand Shrivastava was employed as Samiti Sewak in the Gramin Sewa Sahkari Samiti, Bankhedi. In pursuance of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him, an order dismissing respondent No. 4 from service was passed on 10-8-1979. Aggrieved by that order, respondent No. 4 raised a dispute under S.55(2) of the M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act); by an order dated 17-12-1981, this dispute was decided in favour of respondent No. 4 by the Assistant Registrar, Co - operative Societies, Raisen. The Assistant Registrar came to the conclusion that the order of dismissal passed against respondent No. 4 on 10-8-1979 was illegal inasmuch as he was not given proper opportunity to defend himself. Against that order, an appeal was preferred by the petitioners before the Joint Registrar, Co - operative Societies, Bhopal which was allowed by the Joint Registrar by his order dated 20-3-1982 and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Registrar, Co - operative Societies for passing a fresh order. The Joint Registrar, while remanding the matter, made an observation that if it was considered necessary fresh issues may be framed and parties may be permitted to adduce additional evidence. Aggrieved by that order, respondent No. 4 preferred a second appeal before the Board of Revenue which was allowed on 30-9-1982 on the short ground that the order of dismissal was passed by the Chairman without obtaining the approval of the Board of Directors, as contemplated by R.44 of the M. P. Sahkari Kendriya Bank Karmachari Sewa Niyam, 1965. It is this order which is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.

2. When the writ petition was presented, one of the questions raised was that the Board of Revenue could not have passed an order directing respondent No. 4 to be reinstated. In this connection, reliance was placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sagar Co - operative Central Bank Ltd., Sagar v. Board of Revenue, M.P., Gwalior , 1982 RN 131. While admitting the writ petition, on the view that the question was of general importance, the petition was referred to a larger Bench. It is thus that the present writ petition has been listed before this Bench.

3. The order of reference is dated 16-12-1982. Before the writ petition could be listed before a larger Bench in pursuance of that order, the same question came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court in Sevaram v. Board of Revenue, M.P. Gwalior, 1983 MPLJ 645 : 1983 Lab IC 1565. It was held that where the disciplinary action resulting in dismissal or removal of the employee of a co - operative society is in violation of the M.P. Co - operative Act or statutory rules, the Registrar or his nominee hearing the dispute referred to him regarding such dismissal or termination shall have power to direct reinstatement on a finding that the dismissal or termination was illegal being in contravention of the Act or statutory rules.

4. The legal question having already been decided by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sevaram Totaram supra, it does not call for any further consideration by us. What was, however, urged by learned counsel for the petitioners was that even though the Board of Revenue was competent to direct reinstatement of respondent No. 4, in the instant case, the ground on which the Board of Revenue reversed the order of the Joint Registrar is, on the face of it, not sustainable. It was pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners in this behalf that reliance