SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 72230

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
V.M.Manohar – Appellant
Versus
The Registrar of Cooperative – Respondent



BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 11/11/2025 Pronounced on : 28/11 / 2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU WP(MD). No. 32006 of 2025 and WMP(MD)Nos.25198 of 2025 V.M.Manohar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies, O/o. the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, No.170, Nv Natarajan Maaligai, EVR High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

2. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies /

Common Cadre Authority, O/o. the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

3. The Administrator, K.N.80, Kumarapuram Thoppur Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society, Kumarapuram Thoppur, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents PRAYER :-

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order vide Na.Ka. 3024/2019/ThoVeSa(16) dated 17.10.2025 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to work continuously in the third respondent society.

For Petitioner : Mr. D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr.M.Ajmalkhan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.F.Deepak, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order vide Na.Ka. 3024/2019/ThoVeSa(16) dated 17.10.2025 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to work continuously in the third respondent society.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an order of transfer has been made against the petitioner by the second respondent without any authority. Firstly, he would submit that the petitioner is coming under the common cadre service which had governed by Common Cadre Service Rules known as Tamil Nadu Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies Common Cadre Service Rules, 2019, which had been issued under Section 180(1) read with Section 75(1) of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act (herein after referred to as ' the Act'). He would further submit that a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.17071 of 2025, in a challenge to the said provision of Section 75 of the Act, had granted interim stay of the same. By further orders in the said writ petition, another Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had modified the order only to allow the process of selection to continue and had also restrained the department from issuing any appointment orders without leave of this Court. Therefore, he would submit that the provisions of Section 75(1) of the Act, as of today, now stand in operative and therefore, the common cadre authority cannot continue to make any recommendations. He would further submit that in spite of it, recommendations have been made transferring the petitioner from one Co-operative Society to another. In that context, he would submit that after the amendment of the constitution wherein establishing the Co-operative Society had also been brought under the fundamental right, the authorities cannot by external means control the functioning of the Cooperative Society which would also include transfer of the employees. Even if application of the Rules that had been framed in this regard, such transfer is in violation of the Rule 18 of the Rules which only mandates a transfer from a particular category to the same category and not to any other category. Hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court.

3. Mr.Ajmal Khan, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents would submit that in view of the order of modification, there is no stay of the provisions under Section 75(1) of the Act. He would further submit that the said provisions had been subject matter of the challenge earlier and the same had been upheld until the Hon'ble Apex Court. He would further submi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top