Man Singh Vs. Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and anr.

Man Singh vs Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and anr.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Rajasthan Decided Mar 10, 1993

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/761533

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/761533
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Rajendra Saxena, J.
Decided On: Mar 10, 1993
Case Number: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 404 of 1990
Subject: Civil
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 - Section 74(2)--Subsistence allowance during suspension--Allegations of embezzlements in Samitis--Ordered to give attendance in office during suspension--Absent without leave from 3.12.1988 to 30.1.1990--Held, he is not entitled to subsistence allowance.;There were allegati...

Key legal issue: Civil
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Man Singh

Respondent

Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and anr.

Legal References

Reported In: 1993WLN(UC)126

Excerpt

rajasthan cooperative societies act, 1965 - section 74(2)--subsistence allowance during suspension--allegations of embezzlements in samitis--ordered to give attendance in office during suspension--absent without leave from 3.12.1988 to 30.1.1990--held, he is not entitled to subsistence allowance.;there were allegations against the petitioner that he had committed embezzlements in various samitis, hence he was suspended vide order dated 3.12.1988 ex. 1 and ordered to give his attendance in the office. however, the petitioner remained absent without any leave from 3.12.1988 till 30.1.1990 and submitted his joining report ex. 4 on 30 1.1990. hence the petitioner is not entitled for any subsistence allowance for the said period.;(b) constitution of india - article 226--writ--final order passed by competent authority--held, writ has become infructuous.;since a final order has already been passed by a competent authority against the petitioner the impugned suspension order ex. 1 has merged therein and this writ petition has become infructuous.;writ dismissed - .....him and prayed that despite specific mention therein that the subsistence allowance shall be paid to him, the respondents have neither paid him the suspension allowance nor conducted the disciplinary enquiry.3. the respondents in their counter have alleged that the petitioner has concealed material facts and narrated false facts to the effect that he had already found guilty of embezzlements after enquiry under section 74(2) of the rajasthan cooperative societies act vide annexure-r/1 dated 18.6.1987, annexure-r/2 dated 27.2.88 and annexure-r/3 dated 9.8.1988 and on this ground alone this writ petition deserves to be dismissed. they have further alleged that there were allegations against the petitioner that he had committed embezzlements in various samitis, hence he was suspended vide order dated 3.12.1988 ex. 1 and ordered to give his attendance in the office. however, the petitioner remained absent without any leave from 3.12.1988 till 30.1.1990 and submitted his joining report ex. 4 on 30.1.1990. hence the petitioner is not entitled for any subsistence allowance for the said period. the respondents have also submitted office order dated 31.5.1990 annexure-r/5, a bare perusal thereof reveals that after conducting the necessary enquiry, the petitioner has been found guilty of the misconduct of committing embezzlement as also for the misconduct of wilfully remaining absent from duty and his services have been terminated.4. in such circumstances, since a final order has already been passed by a competent authority against the petitioner the impugned suspension order ex. 1 has merged therein and this writ petition has become infructuous.5. hence, this writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous. however, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek his remedy about the termination of his services and penalty inflicted upon him by the respondents in accordance with law. no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

Rajendra Saxena, J.

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner by means of this writ petition has challenged his suspension order dated 3.12.1988 Ex. 1 passed by respondent No. 2 for contemplated disciplinary enquiry against him and prayed that despite specific mention therein that the subsistence allowance shall be paid to him, the respondents have neither paid him the suspension allowance nor conducted the disciplinary enquiry.

3. The respondents in their counter have alleged that the petitioner has concealed material facts and narrated false facts to the effect that he had already found guilty of embezzlements after enquiry Under Section 74(2) of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act vide Annexure-R/1 dated 18.6.1987, Annexure-R/2 dated 27.2.88 and Annexure-R/3 dated 9.8.1988 and on this ground alone this writ petition deserves to be dismissed. They have further alleged that there were allegations against the petitioner that he had committed embezzlements in various Samitis, hence he was suspended vide order dated 3.12.1988 Ex. 1 and ordered to give his attendance in the office. However, the petitioner remained absent without any leave from 3.12.1988 till 30.1.1990 and submitted his joining report Ex. 4 on 30.1.1990. Hence the petitioner is not entitled for any subsistence allowance for the said period. The respondents have also submitted office order dated 31.5.1990 Annexure-R/5, a bare perusal thereof reveals that after conducting the necessary enquiry, the petitioner has been found guilty of the misconduct of committing embezzlement as also for the misconduct of wilfully remaining absent from duty and his services have been terminated.

4. In such circumstances, since a final order has already been passed by a competent authority against the petitioner the impugned suspension order Ex. 1 has merged therein and this writ petition has become infructuous.

5. Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek his remedy about the termination of his services and penalty inflicted upon him by the respondents in accordance with law. No order as to costs.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1993 Same Parties Man Singh vs Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. and anr. Same Subject Civil Same Judge Rajendra Saxena, J.

Civil