[2025:RJ-JD:3040] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2186/2018 Narsinghram S/o Shri Puna Ram Meghwal, R/o Village- Karamawas, Tehsil- Samdari, District- Barmer, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Registrar, Co-Operative Societies Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Additional Registrar Co-Operative Societies Rajasthan, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 3. Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies Rajasthan, Barmer, Rajasthan. 4. Managing Director, The Barmer Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Head Office, Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer, Rajasthan. 5. Chairman, Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti Limited, Phulan, Panchayat Samiti, Siwana, Tehsil- Samdari, District- Barmer, Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Deora For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.J. Punia Mr. Surendra Singh Choudhary for respondent - Bank JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order 16/01/2025 1. The present writ petition was preferred for the following reliefs:- “A/- By an appropriate writ, order or direction, if any verbal/written resolution taken by the respondents for termination of the petitioner from the post of vyavsthapak of , Phulan, Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti, Phulan be kindly quashed and set aside. B/- By and appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to [2025:RJ-JD:3040] (2 of 3) [CW-2186/2018] allow the petitioner to resume back his duties of vyavsthapak of , Phulan, Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti, Phulan with all consequential benefits. C/- By an appropriate writ, order of direction the respondents may kindly be directed to pay all dues of the payment as per rules, regulations and resolutions which were not yet paid to the petitioner. C/- By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the petitioner directly for the post of vyavsthapak as experienced and already screened candidate in pursuance of fresh letter dated 19.01.2018 (Annex-13) E/- Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. E/- Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs.” 2. Mr. Deora, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, an inquiry was instituted by the respondents and the inquiry officer vide his report dated 14.11.2022 in no ambiguous terms recorded a finding of innocence qua the petitioner and recommended that he be reinstated with all back-wages. 3. The petitioner has raised a grievance that in spite of the observation made by this Court during the proceedings of 12.02.2024, the respondents have not done anything and they have not reinstated the petitioner. 4. Mr. Punia, learned counsel for the respondent-Samiti is not in position to apprise the Court that as to whether the decision has been taken by the competent authority in furtherance of the inquiry report dated 14.11.2022 and if not then why? 5. The petition is however disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent No.4 [2025:RJ-JD:3040] (3 of 3) [CW-2186/2018] along with photocopy of the inquiry report dated 14.11.2022 and certified copy of the order instant within a period of two weeks from today. 6. In case a representation is so addressed before the respondent No.4, he or any other authority competent shall consider and take a decision thereupon within a period of four weeks of receiving the same. 7. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner’s grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner. 8. In case, petitioner’s representation is not favorably decided he shall be free to file a fresh writ petition in accordance with law. 9. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly. (DINESH MEHTA),J 76-Arvind/-