Disciplinary proceedings against retired employees cannot continue without relevant service rules allowing such actions; withholding terminal benefits under these circumstances is illegal.

ORDER :

1. W.P. No.27668/24 has been filed to forbear the 1st respondent from continuing the disciplinary proceedings with a further plea to settle the petitioners statutory service benefits along with interest; W.P. No. 3901/25 has been filed to quash the charge memo and for a consequential direction to the respondents to retire the petitioner from service and pay the service benefits to the petitioner upon retirement; W.P. No.7574/25 has been filed to quash the impugned order imposing penalty by rejecting the enquiry officer’s report of exoneration of the petitioner in view of the order of the disciplinary authority permitting the petitioner to retire from service and W.P. No.34518/25 has been filed praying to quash the charge memo and consequently to direct the respondents to pay the retirements benefits to the petitioner along with interest from the date of retirement till the date of payment.

2. The short point that falls for consideration of this Court is as to whether after permitting an employee to retire from service, disciplinary proceedings could be initiated/could be continued against an employee. To answer the aforesaid plea, the petitioners place reliance on the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in S. Andiyannan & Ors. Vs. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Ors. 2015 (3) LW 513, wherein, the Full Bench, on a reference placed before it, had answered the reference in the following lines :- “This Reference has been made to this Larger Bench of Three Judges by the Hon’ble The Chief Justice to answer the following questions of law :-

“1) Whether the disciplinary proceedings initiated against an employee of a co-operative society governed by the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 , could be continued even after retirement of the said employee.

2. Whether Section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 , could be considered as an enabling provision impliedly empowering the disciplinary authority to continue the disciplinary proceedings even after the retirement of an employee of a co-operative society, governed by the * * * * * 

29. Answer to the first question referred to this Bench:

Under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 , once an employee retired from service, there could be no authority vested with the employer for continuing any disciplinary proceeding, in the absence of relevant service Rules permitting the employer to continue the disciplinary proceeding. In other words, if there is no service Rules or bye- law of the society empowering the employer to continue the departmental proceeding, the employer, would have no authority to continue the departmental proceeding after the retirement of the employee.

Answer to the second question referred to this Bench:

As contemplated under Section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 , the term 'surcharge' is not penal in nature, hence if there is admission with regard to the loss caused by the employee or the same is established by the co- operative institution, based on the proceeding already initiated for surcharge, the same could be recovered in the manner known to law. However, the provision relating to surcharge under of the Act is not impliedly empowering the disciplinary authority to continue any disciplinary proceeding against an employee, who retired from service, in the absence of any Service Rules or Bye-law. Hence, of the said Act cannot be construed as an enabling provision or impliedly empowering provision to the employer to continue any disciplinary proceeding afte