O R D E R

The petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition challenging the impugned inquiry report of the 3rd respondent dated 04.03.2019 passed under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act.

2.According to the petitioner, he was working as Co-operative Sub-Registrar in Cuddalore District. The 4th respondent Society is established for Government servants. In the said Society, the petitioner was elected as Vice-President for the period from 01.11.1996 – 25.05.2001. During the said period, he was acting as in-charge Secretary of 4th respondent Society from 03.10.1998 – 25.05.2001. Subsequently, he was working as Special Officer of the 4th respondent Society from 25.05.2001 – 30.09.2004. The petitioner attained age of superannuation on 30.06.2012, but was not allowed to retire, as he was placed under suspension on 08.06.2012. One Tmt.M.Ramani and M.Ganesan availed housing loan to the tune of Rupees Five Lakhs from the 4th respondent Society for the purpose of raising construction and mortgaged the property measuring an extent of 2280 sq.ft. comprised in T.S.Nos.555 and 556 situated in Ward No.2, Block No.7, Kovalan Street, Cuddalore and a mortgage deed was registered as Document No.2921/1999 on the file of Joint Sub Registrar Office, Cuddalore-2. The said Ramani and Ganesan failed to repay the amounts. The 4th respondent Society initiated proceedings under Section 90 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act') and obtained decree dated 28.05.2004. Subsequently, the 4th respondent did not proceed further against the said Ramani and Ganesan to execute the decree. While so, by proceedings of 2nd respondent dated 09.08.2018, the 3rd respondent was appointed as Enquiry Officer under Section 81 of the Act to conduct enquiry. Even prior to that, an enquiry under Section 81 of the Act was already ordered, enquiry conducted and report was filed. The enquiry now ordered is second enquiry. The enquiry under Section 81 of the Act cannot be ordered again and again as it amounts to double jeopardy. The present Enquiry Officer filed report stating that the petitioner has sold mortgaged property along with borrower and recommended to initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioner, the said M.Ramani and M.Ganesan, the borrowers.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that Enquiry Officer has no power to recommend to initiate criminal proceedings. The 4th respondent, though obtained decree in the year 2004, did not take any steps to execute the decree. To cover up their mistake, the present enquiry has been ordered. The said M.Ramani and M.Ganesan paid the amount by way of one time settlement on 05.02.2020 and no amount is due in 4th respondent Society. In the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Secretary of 4th respondent, the Enquiry Officer held that mortgaged property was not sold and prayed for allowing the Writ Petition.

4(i).The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit and denied all the averments made in the affidavit. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that while the petitioner was functioning as Vice President, Secretary In-charge and Special Officer of the 4th respondent Society, he has sanctioned and disbursed various irregular housing loan to its members. The petitioner sanctioned housing loan to M.Ramani and M.Ganesan and they executed a mortgage deed for the property measuring 2280 sq. ft. in Document No.2921/1999, on the file of the Joint Sub Registrar, Cuddalore-2. After being retired from the 4th respondent Society, in the capacity of Vice President, Secretary and Special Officer of the 4th respondent Society, petitioner got the general power of Attorney from the said M.Ramani and M.Ganesan and sold the properties measuring 5408.91 sq. ft., including mortgaged property measuring 2280 sq. ft. to one Anjammal, by registered sale deed dated 02.09.2008 bearing Document No.3595/2008.

4(