ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to settle a sum of Rs.1,76,476/-(Rupees one lakh seventy six thousand four hundred and seventy six only) towards medical reimbursement and balance salary of Rs.11,575/-(Rupees eleven thousand five hundred and seventy five only) with interest thereof, as per the circular Na.Ka.No.11759/97.98/E2 dated 27.06.98.

2.Though the petitioner has made a claim towards medical reimbursement and balance of salary, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the withholding sum of Rs.11,575/- was pursuant to an order passed for recovery, which was never challenged by the petitioner.

3.As regards the medical reimbursement, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had undergone heart surgery on 14.03.2006 in the hospital recognized and approved in the circular dated 27.06.1998. According to which, the petitioner was eligible for medical reimbursement to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is stated that the petitioner sent a few representations, after his surgery, for medical reimbursement. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of writ petition against Co-operative Society referring to the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Pitchumani and Others -vs- The Management of Sri Chakra Tyres Limited, reported in 2004(2) LLN 1086 and a few other judgments.

4.It is the case of the second respondent that the second respondent which is a co-operative institution is governed by the provisions of Tamil Nadu Co-opeative Societies Act. Referring to Section 72 of the Tamil Nadu Co- operative Societies Act, it was pointed out by the second respondent that the second respondent has framed regulations relating to medical reimbursement to its employees subject to By-law No.44 of the Bank. As per Regulations, it is stated that the respondents are liable to provide medical reimbursement to employees only from and out of the Employees Reserve Fund created from the net profit of the bank or general funds of the bank. Since the Society is continuously incurring loss, it is further contended that there is no scope for disbursing medical reimbursement to the petitioner. The petitioner has approached this Court earlier for similar relief by filing a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.11791 of 2011. It was also contended by the petitioner that the respondent bank have settled the amount towards medical reimbursement to the employees, who are similarly placed like that of the petitioner. This Court finally disposed of the said writ petition in the following lines:

“13.In such view of the matter, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the writ petition pending. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to submit a fresh representation enclosing all the details including proof to show that two other employees who are similarly placed like that of the petitioner were granted medical relief. Such representation shall be submitted within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law and if two other employees have been granted the medical relief, then the second respondent shall also consider the case of the petitioner on par with the said two employees. Such orders shall be passed within a period of four weeks thereafter. No costs.”

5.Pursuant to the direction of this Court in the previous writ petition filed by the petitioner, it is seen that the petitioner requested for the information under Right To Information Act, to furnish the particulars about the disbursement of amount towards medical reimbursement to other persons. However, a reply was sent to the petitioner stating that no document or record is available to show any disbursement towards medical reimbursement to an