An attachment order issued without the necessary pending proceedings under applicable statutes is jurisdictionally invalid.

PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.8798/2022/VI.A dated 01.09.2022 [not communicated] i.e, the conditional attachment order, by erroneously mentioning that the petitioner as the President of K.K.168, Naripalli Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, and quash the same and consequently direct the 4th respondent to remove the encumbrances in respect of the properties found mentioned in the 3rd respondent's conditional attachment order dated

01.09.2022 on its file.

For Petitioner Mr.S.Sathiaseelan For Respondent(s): Mrs.E.Ranganayaki, GA for RR1 to 3 Mrs.A.Bakkialakshmi, GA for R4

ORDER

(1) The above writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the conditional attachment order dated 01.09.2022, of the 3rd respondent and consequently, to direct the 4th respondent to remove the encumbrances in respect of the properties.

(2) The petitioner's wife was elected as the President of KK168 Naripalli Primary Cooperative Agricultural Society, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. While so, an enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] was ordered for the loss caused to the Society. An Enquiry Officer was appointed, an enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer in her Report, dated 09.03.2022, found that grave financial irregularities to the tune of Rs.17,39,25,203/- were committed in the Society. Thereafter, the Society submitted an application to the 1st respondent for issuance of an order of interim attachment of immovable properties belonging to the petitioner under Section 167 of the Act. Based on the application of the Society, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order on 01.09.2022, attaching the petitioner's property. Aggrieved by the impugned attachment order, the petitioner filed the above writ petition.

(3) The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit stating inter alia that the impugned order was passed pursuant to an enquiry under Section 81 of the Act whereunder it was found that grave irregularities leading to severe financial loss to the tune of Rs.17,39,25,203/- was committed in the Society. The respondents stated that if the petitioner's properties were not attached, the recovery of the said amount would be impossible. The respondents hence prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. The petitioner filed a reply to the counter affidavit.

(4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was exfacie illegal since the provisions of Section 167 of the Cooperative Societies Act, could be invoked only in cases where main case was pending under the various provisions stated therein. The learned counsel submitted that in the absence of any proceedings under the aforesaid sections, the impugned order of attachment before judgment was unsustainable and invalid. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submitted that the impugned order was passed without jurisdiction and the same was liable to be quashed.

(5) The learned counsel appearing for the respondents reiterated the submissions made in the counter affidavit. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that if the petitioner's properties were not attached,, the petitioner would encumber the properties making it impossible for the Society to recover its losses. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

(6) I have heard the submissions made on either side and also perused the mat