IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
The Secretary, Government Regional Workshop Employees Co-Operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
G.Pandurangan – Respondent
W.A.No.2126 of 2022 and CMP.No.15813 of 2022
Decided on : 01-08-2024
Cooperative - Guarantor Liability - Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act - Section 48 - The court interpreted Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, affirming that it allows recovery of loan dues from a guarantor's gratuity, overriding other laws, thus validating the society's actions against the guarantor.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a Cooperative Society, challenged a writ order that prevented recovery of loan dues from a guarantor's gratuity, arguing that the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act permits such recovery.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, particularly Section 48, allow for the recovery of loan dues from a guarantor's gratuity, and that the writ court erred in its decision.
Issues: Whether the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act permits the recovery of loan dues from a guarantor's gratuity and if the writ court's ruling was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act prevails over other laws, allowing recovery from a guarantor's gratuity without the need for a show cause notice.
Result: The writ appeal is allowed, and the writ order dated 04.03.2022 is set aside.
JUDGMENT :
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 04.03.2022 passed in WP.No.16488/2013 in so far as appellant is concern.
The writ appeal on hand is instituted by the Secretary, Government Regional Workshop Employee Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Limited challenging the writ order dated 04.03.2022 in WP.No.16488 of 2013. The appellant is the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. The appellant is a Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of The Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act 1983. The employees working in the Government Regional Workshop are eligible to become the Members of the Cooperative Society and the Society itself was formed by the employees of the Government Regional Workshop and registered under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act.
2. There is no Government funding for the Cooperative Society. The funds contributed by the members are utilized for the purpose of granting the loan to other eligible members.
3. Admittedly, the first respondent stood as a guarantor to the borrower, who is also a member of the appellant-Cooperative Society. The Principal committed default in repayment and the Society proceeded against the guarantor/first respondent. Liability of the Guarantor admittedly coexists with the liability of the principal borrower. That being the first principle in law, there is no impediment for the Society to proceed against the guarantor to recover the loan dues.
4. The competent Authority of the Government Automobile Workshop at Cuddalore issued an order dated 22.01.2013 recovering the gratuity amount of Rs.1,48,388/- of the first respondent. Challenging the said order, the Writ petition came to be instituted. The Writ Court allowed the writ petition mainly on the ground that no notice was issued to the first respondent and under the provisions of the Gratuity Act, the amount of gratuity cannot be recovered. Thus, the present writ appeal.
5. The learned counsel for the writ appellant Mr.P.K.Shiva Kumar, would submit that even under the Gratuity Act, recovery is permissible. Rule 70 of The Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 permits the employer to recover the loan dues and settle the same to the Society. Thus, the Writ Court has committed an error in allowing the writ petition filed by the first respondent. Regarding issuance of show cause notice, the same would not arise in view of the fact that the first respondent stood as a Guarantor and he is aware of the default committed by the Principal borrower and thus, such a show cause notice becomes a empty formality and as per the undertaking given by the guarantor in the loan forms is liable to repay the loan amount in the event of default by the principal employer.
6. Mrs.Geetha Thamaraiselvan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 2, 3 and 5 would submit that the Department Authorities are empowered to recover the gratuity amount and disburse the same to the Cooperative Society in order to clear the loan dues. Such an undertaking has been given by the Pay Disbursing Officer at the time of approval of loan application and therefore, the competent authority is duty bound to recover and settle the loan dues as per law. Thus, the writ Court has not considered the said position and consequently, the writ appeal is to be considered.
7. Heard the parties.
8. Curiously, none of the parties have raised the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, which would be applicable for the loan transactions of the Cooperative Societies. Admittedly, the appellant is a Cooperative Society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, and the said Act would be applicable for the purpose of grant of loan and recovery of a loan dues. The Government employees are the members of the Cooperative Society formed and registered by them. The transactions are governed under the provisions of the Coo
AI
Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act allows recovery of loan dues from a guarantor's gratuity, overriding other laws.
Liability in surcharge proceedings must be determined based on individual employee involvement during the relevant period, not collectively.
Amended regulations on deductions from retirement gratuity do not apply retroactively to loans granted before their enactment, preserving previously established employee consents.
The lack of a tripartite agreement precludes the Central Government from deducting dues from DCRG payable to absorbed employees.
The court reinforced that cooperative banks must adhere to statutory schemes to refund fixed depositors while establishing a framework for recovering debts and ensuring compliance with financial regu....
Surcharge proceedings cannot be continued after the retirement of an employee, and the gratuity amount is protected from attachment under Section 13 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
The financial viability of a Co-operative Society and the applicability of the Minimum Wages Act to such societies were central to the judgment.
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.