IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.02.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA

W.P.No.2228 of 2018

and

WMP.Nos.2726 and 2727 of 2018

.. Petitioner

J.A.Murugan

Vs

1. The Director,

Vigilance and Anti Corruption,

No.293 MKN Road, Alandur,

Chennai-16.

2. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies,

No.170, Periyar EVR High Road,

Kilpauk, Chennai-10.

3. The Joint Registar of Co-operative Societies,

Krishnagiri Region, Krishnagiri.

4. The Deputy Registar of Co-operative Societies,

Hosur Circle, Hosur,

Krishnagiri District.

5.T.K.122, Krishnagiri District National

Engineering employees Co-operative

Thrift and Credit Society,

Rep by its President,

Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

6.The Inspector of Police,

Vigilance and Anti Corruption,

Krishnagiri

.. Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the

records of the 1^st respondent in his letter Rc.17/2017, Coop.KG

dated 27.10.2017, the letter of the 2^nd

respondent in

Rc.No.14430/2017/B11 dated 1.12.2017, the letter of the 3^rd

respondent in Na.Ka.No.6166/2017Thava(2), dated 15.12.2017 and

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the order of the 4^th respondent in Na.Ka.130/2017Pu.Vee(1) dated

08.01.2018 quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy

For Respondents: Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan

(R1 and R6)

Special Government Pleader

(R2 to R5)

Ms.T.Girija (R2 to R5)

Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the

proceedings of the first respondent dated 27.10.2017, the

proceedings of the second respondent dated 1.12.2017 and the

proceedings of the third respondent dated 15.12.2017 and also

the order of the fourth respondent dated 08.01.2018 and to

quash the same.

2. The case of the petitioner is that when the petitioner

was working as a Secretary in the fifth respondent Society, he

was arrested by the sixth respondent police and an FIR was filed

against him under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,

1988 and the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, granted bail to the

petitioner. Thereafter, the fifth respondent by its resolution

dated 30.06.2017 revoked the suspension of the petitioner dated

24.01.2017 and reinstated him in service and the petitioner

joined the duty on 30.06.2017 and he was working as a Secretary

in the fifth respondent society.

3. Mr.S.Palaniswamy, the learned counsel for the petitioner

by assailing the impugned orders submitted that when the

petitioner is a Secretary of the firth respondent Society viz.

Krishnagiri District National Engineering Employees Co-operative

Thrift and Credit Society, he cannot be construed as as public

servant. Therefore, the first respondent cannot request the

second respondent to obtain sanction from the fifth respondent

to prosecute the petitioner under Section 19(1)(c) of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Adding further, he has

stated that the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act

1988 is meant for prosecuting only the public servants but not

the employees of the Co-operative Society. Since Article 12 of

constitution of India is not applicable to the co-operative

society and the Co-operative Society is not a 'State' within the

meaning of Article 12 of constitution of India, Prevention of

Corruption Act cannot be invoked on the employees of the Co-

operative Societies.

Moreover, Tamil Nadu Co-operative

Societies is a self contained Act and any prosecution of

offences under the said Act can be investigated and prosecuted

by a separate wing established by the state of Tamil Nadu i.e.

Commercial Crime Investigation wing (CCIW). Whereas, Anti

corruption wing of the Central Government has jurisdiction to

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

enquire into the alleged