SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 761

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
R. Sundararajan – Appellant
Versus
The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited, Chennai – Respondent
W.P. No. 767 of 2015
Decided on : 18-07-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :V. Paul Paneerselvam, A.R. Nixon, Advocates

Exhaustion of statutory remedy before approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Additional Change Allowance - The court held that when an efficacious alternate remedy is available under a Special Act, it must be exhausted before approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The aggrieved persons are expected to exhaust the alternate remedy contemplated under the Statutes and Rules in force and thereafter, approach the High Court. The High Court would be in a position to exercise the power of judicial review effectively only after findings by the Appellate Authority or Revisional Authority.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a retired Electrical Operator, sought additional change allowance from the respondent Tamil Nadu Co-operative Marketing Federation. The respondent's order was challenged in the writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court emphasized the need to exhaust the statutory remedy under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act before approaching the High Court. It directed the petitioner to approach the competent forum for redressal of grievances.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to additional change allowance and if the High Court could intervene without exhausting the statutory remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that aggrieved persons must exhaust the alternate remedy contemplated under the Statutes and Rules before approaching the High Court. The High Court's power of judicial review is effective only after findings by the Appellate Authority or Revisional Authority.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to approach the competent forum for redressal of grievances.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.736/2013/ Pa.Tho. Dated 24.11.2013 and quash the same thereby directing the respondent to sanction additional change allowance writ interest to the petitioner.)

1. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to call for the records relating to the order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.736/2013/ Pa.Tho. dated 24.11.2013 and quash the same thereby directing the respondent to sanction additional change allowance writ interest to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is a retired Electrical Operator of Pamani Fertilizers, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur District and the respondent Tamil Nadu Co-operative Marketing Federation is a Society registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner retired on 31.07.2013 and he states that he served in two Additional Charges for 13 months and the Additional charge allowance as applicable has not been paid.

3. In this regard, the petitioner has to approach the Revisional authority under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. In respect of the Co-operative Societies registered under the Act, the aggrieved employees are bound to exhaust the Statutory remedy contemplated, in view of the principles laid down by the Larger Bench of the High Court of Madras in the case of K.Marappan v. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Namakkal Circle, Namakkal and another, reported in (2006 (4) CTC 689.

4. When an efficacious alternate remedy is contemplated under the Special Act, the said remedy is to be exhausted for the purpose of resolving the disputed issues. An adjudication of disputed issues are of paramount importance with reference to the original documents and evidences. Such a roving enquiry cannot be conducted by the High Court in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, in all circumstances, the aggrieved persons are expected to exhaust the alternate remedy contemplated under the Statutes and Rules in force and thereafter, approach the High Court. In the event of findings by the Appellate Authority or Revisional Authority, the High Court would be in a position to exercise the power of judicial review in an effective manner.

5. This being the principles to be followed, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent Forum for the purpose of redressal of his grievances in the manner known to law.

6. In the event of any such approach before the competent Forum, such Forum shall take into consideration the period, during which, the writ petition was pending before the High Court for the purpose of condoning the delay and decide the issues on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

7. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top