The petitioner must exhaust further remedies under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, including facing the pending criminal case and approaching the Reviewing Authority under Section 154 for redressal.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in her proceedings Na.Ka.1854/2014, Thu.Va.Tha.1, dated 20.06.2014 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to disburse the entire terminal benefits together with interest to the petitioner.)

1. The order of termination and the subsequent order passed by the Reviewing Authority under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner states that he was appointed as a Salesman and subsequently promoted as Clerk and Secretary in the 2nd respondent Society. On account of the allegations of misappropriation of the funds of the 2nd respondent/Co-operative Society to the tune of Rs.19,30,550/-, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated. In view of the fact that the misappropriation was running to the tune of Rs.19,30,550/-, a charge memo was issued. The petitioner defended his case by denying the charges. However, an enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer found that the charges against the writ petitioner are held proved. The report of the enquiry was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority, who in turn imposed the major penalty of termination from service. Against the order passed by the management of the 2nd respondent/Co-operative Society, the petitioner preferred a Revision Petition under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The Joint Registrar also adjudicated the facts and circumstances and formed an opinion that there was a misappropriation based on the enquiry report and accordingly, rejected the Review Petition filed by the writ petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the actual misappropriation was committed by the cashier and the petitioner being a Secretary, against whom, the allegation of the lapses alone is raised. Therefore, the major penalty is unwarranted.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that these aspects were not considered by the Enquiry Officer and as well as by the Statutory Enquiry Officer under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. None of the officials have considered these aspects with reference to the documents and evidences available on record.

5. The 2nd respondent/Co-operative Society placed the records before this Court and perusal of the 81 enquiry report reveals that there was a collusion and lapses, which resulted in misappropriation of the funds of the 2nd respondent Co-operative Society to the tune of Rs.19,30,550/- In view of the fact that the petitioner is raising certain factual disputes, the same is to be adjudicated before the competent authority with reference to the original documents and evidences. Such an enquiry cannot be conducted by the High Court in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Act contemplates review under Section 154 of the Act before the competent authority. The Reviewing Authority is empowered to call for the entire records and adjudicate the factual issues on merits and in accordance with law, if required by taking further evidences. When such a scope is provided under the provisions of the Act, more specifically, under Section 154 of the Act, the petitioner has to exhaust the same, in view of the fact that he is raising certain factual disputes with reference to the findings. Under these circumstances, the petitioner has to exhaust the further alternate remedy contemplated under Section 154 of the Act for final adjudication of the disputed facts between the parties.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent/Co-operative Society brought to the notice of this Court that with reference to the misappropriation of the funds of the Society, a Criminal Case was registered before the Commercial Crimes