D.S. SINHA, J.

(1. ) The petitioners are aggrieved by the orders of the Secrrtary/ Samanya Prabandhak, Zila Sahkari Bank Budaun, reverting them to the post of clerk from the post of Junior Manager.

(2. ) Initially the petitioners were appointed as clerks in the District Co-operative Bank, Budaun and continued to work as such till they were promoted as Incharge Branch Manager. Later on in pursuance of a Circular issued by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, namely, Circular No. C-187/ST/ Notification dated 10th December, 1976 a new staffing pattern was enforced and the petitioners were placed in the payscale of Rs. 250-15-400 E. B. 20-600 with tb'e designation of Junior Branch Manager assigned to them. Thus the petitioners were adjusted to the post of Junior Branch Manager. The assertion of the petitioners, to which there is no effective denial, is that they were confirmed as Branch Manager by the resolution of (he Board of Directors dated 12th November, 1980 with effect from 1st November, 1980. Ever since the adjustment and absorption as Branch Manager the petitioners have been continuously working on the said post and by now they have put in more than a decade of service as Junior Branch Manager.

(3. ) Suddenly, in March, 1987, the petitioners were ordered to be reverted to the post of clerk by means of the orders impugned in the writ petitions.

(4. ) We have heard-Shri R. G. Srivastava, Senior Advocate, appearing for petitioners and Shri P. P. Srivastava, learacd counsel lor respondents.

(5. ) Learned counsel for petitioners urges that the impugned orders have . been passed under misconception of the provisions of law. Further contention of the learned counsel is that petitioners having worked on the post of Junior Branch Manager continuously for a period of more than a decade their reversion to the post of clerk, in any case, is arbitrary and unjustified.

(6. ) It appears that the reversion of petitioners has been ordered on the ground that no approval from the U. P. Co operative Institutional Service Board for their promotion/appointment was obtained under the provisions of Regulation 5 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Employees Service Regulations, 1975 and in absence of such approval the promotion/appointment of petitioners on the post of Junior Branch Manager could not be continued beyond a period of six months.

(7. ) The relevant extract of Regulation 5, as it stood at the time of promotion/appointment of petitioners as junior Branch Manager, is as below:

"5. Recruitment. (i) recruitment for all appointments in a Co operative Society shall be made through the Board whether the recruitment is (a) direct, or (b) by promotion from employees already in the service of the Society ; or (c) bv taking on deputation or otherwise a person who is already in the service of any other Society registered or deemed to have ' been registered under the Act. (ii) notwithstanding anything in clause (i) no reference to the Board shall be necessary in the following cases ; (a) when it is proposed to fill with the concurrence of the Registrar any post by means of deputation of a Government Servant, or (b) when officiatirg promotion is made by the appointing authority from a lower rank to the next higher rank for a period not exceeding six months."

Prom the above provision it is clear that in case of promotion/appointment made by way of stop-gap arrangement no approval was needed.

(8. ) The above Regulation 5 was amended with effect from 30th July, 1983. The relevant extract of the amended Regulation 5 is being reproduced below :

"5. Recruitment. (i) Recruitment for all appointment in a Co-operative Society shall be made through the Board whether the recruitment is: (a) direct, or (b) by promotion from employees already in the service of the Society, or (c) by taking on deputation or otherwise, a person already in the service of another Society, registered or deemed to have been registered under the Act, or a person in employment under a corporation or an undertaking owned or controlled by the Central or the State Government body Co-operative administering a local fund. ' (ii) Notwithstanding anything in Clause (i) no reference to the Board shall be necessary in the following cases : (a) when it is proposed to fill with the concurrence of the Registrar any post by means of deputation of a Government Servant, or (b) when the Managing Committee or any other authority competent to make the appointment proposes to fill up, as a stop gap measure' for a period not exceeding six months, a post by promotior from amongst the employees in the just below cadre on the principles of seniority, subject to the rejection of the unfit.Provided that any appointment thus made without consultation with the Board shall, in every case, cease to have effect from the date on which the period of six months expires and the employee promoted to the higher post shall, unless he has already been reverted to his original post within the said period of six months, be deemed to have reverted from that date, to the post held by him immediately before such promotion, Provided further that the employee appointed to the higher post under this sub-clause shall, in no circumstances, be promoted under this sub-clause to any still higher post within the said period of six months, nor shall be appointed under this sub-clause to the same post again after his reversion under the first proviso.

(9. ) It is manifestly clear that approval of the U, P. Co-operative Institutional Service Board for the appointment of petitioners as Junior Branch Manager would have been necessary if the same bad been made after 30th July, 1983. The promotion/appointment of petitioners having been made much before the amendment no approval of the Board was needed. The amendment is prospective in nature and cannot be retrospectively applied to cover the promotion/appointment of the petitioners. Thus the ground of lack of approval of the Board on the basis of which the impugned orders have been passed is unsustainable. The impugned orders, having been passed on misconceived and untenable ground, are liable to be quashed.

(10. ) The second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners also has force. It is not disputed that the petitioners have worked as Junior Branch Manager for more than a decade continuously without any disapproval for any authority. The petitioners having been allowed to function as Junior Blanch Manager for such a long period without any objection their appointments may he deemed to have been acquiesced by the respondents and cannnnnnot be invalidated. This view is fortified by the view taken by Hon'ble S

upreme Court in the case of Nyayagarh Co- operative Central Board, Ltd. v. Narayan Rath, [AIR 1977 SC 112]. In the said case the petitioner was allowed to functional Secretary for a period of over 13 years. Hon'ble Supreme Court held that for all practical purposes the appointment of the incumbent had been acquiesced and accepted as valid and it would not be desirable that the appointment should be invalidated after a lapse of several years. (11. ) For what has been said above the petition succeeds and is allowed. Tbe orders dated 9th February and 2nd March, 1987 purporting to revert the petitioners from the post of Junior Branch Manager to the post of clerk are hereby quashed. The parties shall bear their own costs. Order accordingly.