1 2025:CGHC:5739 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7070 of 2024 1 - Santosh Kunjam S/o Shri Samay Lal Aged About 45 Years R/o Gram Panchayat Mudhipar, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Co- Operative, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Registrar, Co-Operative Societies Chhattisgarh, Block- 3, Second And Third Floor, Indrawati Bhavan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Divisional Joint Registrar Cooperative Societies, Durg Division, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - Prescribed Authority/ Prescribed Officer Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 5 - Deputy Registrar Co-Operative Societies, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 6 - Chief Executive Officer District Cooperative Central Bank, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Yogendra Pandey, Advocate RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.02.05 16:58:01 +0530 2 For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31/01/2025 1. Heard Mr. Yogendra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Rishabh Bisen, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent/s. 2. Since the matter is heard and decided finally, therefore, I.A. No.02/2024, which is an application for exemption from filing typed copy is allowed. 3. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the relevant records pertaining to the instant matter. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash / set aside the order dated 15.06.2024 (Annexure P/1) and direct the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner along with all the consequential benefits. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems, fit in the facts and circumstances may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 4. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner has been appointed as a Salesman in the Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society, Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, located in Mudhipar, Chhattisgarh. 3 Since the appointment, the petitioner has diligently and dedicatedly fulfilled the responsibilities of Salesman. Throughout his entire tenure, the petitioner has never received any show cause notices or faced disciplinary actions for negligence or dereliction of duty. This unblemished service record underscores the petitioner's commitment to excellence and professionalism, reflecting consistent track record of reliability and integrity in their role. At this juncture, it is of utmost importance to bring to the attention of this Hon'ble Court the significant developments concerning the governance of the Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, located in Mudhipar. In accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 48(8) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the Board of Directors of the aforementioned cooperative society has been officially superseded. This action was undertaken by the State Government, acting through the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, following careful consideration and evaluation of the prevailing circumstances surrounding the society's management. In light of these developments, the State Government has deemed it necessary to appoint Mr. Loknath Maheshwari as the prescribed authority to oversee and govern the day-to-day activities of Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit. On 12th June 2024, a letter was issued by the Prescribed Authority to the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajnandgaon, highlighting certain irregularities in the Paddy Procurement Centre, Mudhipar, during the paddy procurement process for the 4 year 2023-24. The letter specifically states that employees of Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, have been involved in the misappropriation of approximately 6000 quintals of paddy. In an attempt to conceal this misappropriation, funds from cash on hand, meant to be deposited with the respective District Cooperative Bank, were utilized by the In-Charge of the Paddy Procurement Centre. Furthermore, the letter holds the petitioner accountable for the aforementioned irregularities and recommends that appropriate action be taken against him. In response to the letter dated 12.06.2024, the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajnandgaon, addressed the Prescribed Authority of Seva Sarkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, stating that as per the Service Laws of 2018, particularly Clause 16.12, the Board of Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar is competent to take appropriate action against its employees. Furthermore, the Deputy Registrar emphasized that the Prescribed Authority is responsible for initiating necessary action regarding the misappropriation and must inform the office of the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajnandgaon, of the steps taken. In the meanwhile, and unexpectedly, Shri Dhaneshwar Sahu, the Samiti Manager of Seva Sarkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, was transferred to Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Gopalpur, by order of the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajnandgaon, dated 12th June 2024. Here much to the surprise and shock of the petitioner, an order dated 15.06.2024 was 5 issued, placing the petitioner under suspension. The suspension order mentions alleged misappropriation of paddy and cash at the Paddy Procurement Centre, Mudhipar, as the reason for this disciplinary action. It has been claimed that the petitioner, in violation of the duties outlined under Clause 16.12 of the Service Regulation, 2018, is responsible for the financial irregularities uncovered during the paddy procurement process. It is further significant to note that the Chief Executive Officer of the District Cooperative Central Bank, Rajnandgaon, has already taken proactive steps by directing the Nodal Officer and the Branch Manager of the Mudhipar branch to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) against Mr. Dhaneshwar Sahu, the Society Manager of Seva Sarkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar. This directive is based on the findings of a preliminary enquiry conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank, which uncovered substantial financial misappropriation. The enquiry revealed that between 1st April 2024 and 28th May 2024, a staggering sum of 1,09,44,706 was embezzled by Mr. Sahu in his capacity as Society Manager. Based on the report submitted by the enquiry committee constituted by the District Cooperative Central Bank, Rajnandgaon, the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajnandgaon, issued an order on 24.06.2024 for a formal inquiry under Section 58-B of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. (ANNEXURE P-7). It is further significant to mention that the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Durg Division, Durg, by 6 his order dated 25th June 2024, issued under Section 60(1) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, directed an inspection of the books and records of Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, covering the financial years 2021-22 to 2023- 24. This inspection was ordered following the findings of the enquiry conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank, Rajnandgaon, which uncovered serious financial irregularities committed by the Society Manager of the said society. (ANNEXURE P-8). As stated above, it becomes undoubtedly clear that the entire misappropriation of funds at Seva Sarkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, was orchestrated by the Society Manager. As a result, a First Information Report (FIR) has already been registered against the Society Manager, and the matter is currently under investigation by the police authorities. (ANNEXURE P-9). At this stage it is important to mention here that the suspension of the petitioner appears to disregard the fact that investigations conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank, Rajnandgaon, have pointed to the direct involvement of the Society Manager in the misappropriation, despite these findings, the petitioner has been unfairly held accountable, leading to the suspension. Here it is essential to highlight the explicit guidelines set forth in Clause 17 of the 2018 service regulations, which meticulously outline the procedure for suspending an employee within the primary society. This provision underscores that any employee facing suspension for serious misconduct must first 7 obtain prior approval from the Divisional Joint Registrar. This prerequisite not only ensures accountability but also safeguards the integrity of the suspension process. Once the necessary permission is secured, the Board of the Society is empowered to proceed with the suspension, thereby maintaining a structured and transparent approach to disciplinary actions. This systematic framework reinforces the society's commitment to upholding ethical standards and the principles of natural justice. The rule further states that such order of suspension has to be mandatory be in written format and should also be enclosed in the personal file of the said employee. For ready reference rule 17 (1) has been reproduced below. (A) There has to be action being taken against the said employee for a serious misconduct. (B) Prior permission from the Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies shall be taken (C) The board of the society would be competent to issue the orders for suspension. 5. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that the three critical preconditions for issuing a suspension order by the competent authority have not been satisfied in this case. Firstly, the Board of the society, which typically holds the authority to impose such actions, has been dissolved and replaced by the prescribed authority under Clause 49(8) of the Cooperative Societies Act, as previously noted in this petition. Consequently, any suspension order should emanate from the prescribed authority exercising 8 powers under Rule 17, rather than the dissolved Board. Secondly, the allegations of serious misconduct are unfounded, as neither the inquiry conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank of Rajnandgaon nor the formation of a three-member committee to investigate irregularities under the Branch Manager's supervision references the present petitioner as a wrongdoer. This absence of mention in both communications clearly indicates that no action is being proposed against the petitioner and thirdly, the essential requirement of obtaining prior permission from the Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies has been entirely overlooked. The documentation submitted shows that only the Deputy Registrar's permission was sought, which was granted in a cursory manner without proper consideration. This does not fulfill the requisite condition for prior approval. Thereby, the suspension order is illegal, executed with mala fide intentions, and is non-est in the eyes of the law, warranting its quashing. Here it is important to emphasize that, according to the bye-laws of the Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Mudhipar, particularly Clause 42(2), the powers and responsibilities regarding the maintenance of financial records are clearly defined. This clause explicitly stipulates that the Society Manager (Samiti Prabandhak) is solely responsible for managing all receipts, vouchers, and the cashbook subsidy ledger. It categorically states that these records shall not be maintained by salesman, thereby underscoring the exclusive authority of the Society Manager in handling the society's financial 9 documentation. This provision ensures accountability and integrity in the management of the society's finances.(ANNEXURE P-10). Further it is pertinent to note that the present petitioner, serving as a Salesman, is primarily tasked with specific, limited responsibilities as outlined in the organization's operational framework. This role does not encompass weighing or verifying the actual paddy. As given these defined duties and the procedural safeguards enshrined in the service laws, which require a thorough process prior to any suspension order, it is clear that the present petitioner has been unjustly implicated in allegations of misappropriation and corruption. The inquiry already conducted by the District Cooperative Central Bank of Rajnandgaon and the FIR filed against actual wrongdoers underscore the baseless nature of the claims against the petitioner, who is being subjected to harassment driven by ulterior motives and malafides. In view of these clear violations of statutory provisions, procedural norms, and principles of natural justice, the petitioner respectfully prays for the quashing of the suspension order dated 15.06.2024. The petitioner also seeks restoration to their rightful position, along with all consequential benefits, to remedy the manifest injustice and harm caused by the unlawful suspension. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of suspension has been passed against the Primary Krishi Sakh Sahkari Society Seva Niyam, 2018. According to petitioner before 10 passing order of suspension Rule 17 was required to be followed and it can only be passed after getting approval from the Divisional Joint Registrar, however, that has not been done and thereafter the suspension would not be for more than 3 months and it is required to be extended it could not be extended more than 6 months. However, in the present case nothing has been done and the petitioner is suspended since 15.06.2024 as such the order dated 15.06.2024 is required to be quashed and the authorities are required to be directed to revoke the suspension of the petitioner forthwith. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that though rules have not been followed but looking to the acts committed by the petitioner he has rightly been suspended. 8. Since the order impugned is contrary to Rule 17 of the Service Regulations Act, 2018 as such prima facie it seems that the impugned order has been passed in an illegal and arbitrary manner without following Rule 17 of the Service Regulations Act, 2018 as such without issuing notice to respondent No. 6, the impugned order dated 15.06.2024 is hereby quashed. 9. According, the instant petition is allowed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi