IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
K. Venkataraman – Petitioner
Versus
Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Vellore – Respondent
W.P. Nos. 11309, 17656 of 2020, W.M.P. Nos. 13794, 13795, 21900, 21901 of 2020
Decided On : 27-01-2023
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article, 226 - Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 - Section 153 - Seeking Issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus – Power of High Court to issue certain writs - Writ petitions pertains to impugned proceedings of first respondent Revision Petition subsequent order – Writ Petition filed by Secretary of Sathampakkam Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society has been filed by concerned society writ petitions are dealt with together and this common order is passed – Held, Court has absolutely no hesitation to interfere with impugned proceedings of first respondent Revision Petition subsequent order passed by first respondent in Revision Petition bearing proceedings - Second respondent Society is directed to reinstate petitioner with full back wages continuity of service and all other attendant benefits - While arriving at amount payable to petitioner shall be completed by second respondent Society within a period of four weeks receipt of a copy of this order – Writ Petition stands allowed.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the concerned records from the first respondent, quash the order of the first respondent dated 27.07.2019 in Na. Ka. No. 6043/2019 A2 Revision Petition No. 06/2019 A2 insofar as treating the period from the date of dismissal till reinstatement as one on eligible leave and imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect and the order of the first respondent dated 21.02.2020 bearing Na. Ka. No. 5349/2019 A2 Review Petition No. 1/2020 A2 insofar as denying the period from the date of dismissal till reinstatement as a period of no work no pay and imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently, direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner with full backwages, continuity of service and all other attendant benefits.
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings Na. Ka. No. 6043/2019/A2/Revision Petition No. 06/2019/A2, dated 27.07.2019 and consequential order passed by the first respondent in Revision Petition in his proceedings Na. Ka. No. 5349/2019/A2-Review Petition No. 01/2020 A2, dated 21.02.2020 and quash the same.
1. The subject matter of challenge in both these writ petitions pertains to the impugned proceedings of the first respondent in Na. Ka. No. 6043/2019 A2 Revision Petition No. 06/2019 A2, dated 27.07.2019 and the subsequent order passed by the first respondent in the Review Petition bearing proceedings Na. Ka. No. 5349/2019/A2-Review Petition No. 01/2020 A2, dated 21.02.2020.
2. W.P. No. 11309 of 2020 has been filed by the Secretary of the Sathampakkam Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society and W.P. No. 17656 of 2020 has been filed by the concerned society. In view of the same, both the writ petitions are dealt with together and this common order is passed.
3. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner in W.P. No. 11309 of 2020 will be addressed as the petitioner and the petitioner in W.P. No. 17656 of 2020 will be addressed as the second respondent Society.
4. The case of the petitioner is that he was working as a salesman in the second respondent Society having joined originally in 1989. In 2009, he was promoted as Assistant and thereafter as Secretary. On 04.04.2014, he was placed under suspension on the ground that he had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 3,07,426/- received towards crop insurance.
5. Thereafter a charge memo was issued on 21.05.2014 and despite the explanation by the petitioner denying the charges, an enquiry was conducted into the charges. After conclusion of the enquiry, a report was submitted holding that Charge Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 were fully proved and charge No. 4 was partly proved. Ultimately, by order dated 24.03.2015, the petitioner was dismissed from service.
6. The petitioner thereafter filed a revision petition under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. The first respondent, after consideration of the revision petition, vide order dated 06.07.2015 set aside the order of dismissal and modified the punishment into one of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. However, the second respondent Society without implementing the order of the first respondent has approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition in W.P. No. 26349 of 2015.
7. This Court, vide order dated 27.03.2019, allowed the said Writ Petition on the ground that the order of the first respondent was a non-speaking order and directed the first respondent to decide the revision petition on merits and pass a reasoned order.
8. In pursuance of the order of this Court, th
The standard of proof required under the Co-operative Societies Act is distinct and different from that required under Criminal Law, and preponderance of probabilities suffices for punishment under t....
Termination without adequate evidence and disregard for fair procedures violates principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the appropriateness of the punishment for misappropriation of funds and the reluctance to reduce punishment based on misplaced sympathy.
Delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings and issuing charge memos can vitiate the proceedings and warrant their quashing, especially when the delay is unjustifiable and prejudicial to the employe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that disciplinary proceedings must be supported by valid evidence, and conclusions drawn must be sustainable based on the evidence presented.
The court emphasized that disciplinary actions must obey principles of natural justice, including evidence for charges and payment of subsistence allowance during suspension; non-compliance voids san....
The court emphasized the importance of ensuring fair and legal disciplinary proceedings and held that disciplinary actions must be based on valid grounds and not be initiated for collateral purposes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.