IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.02.2026 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI K.Revathi … Petitioner Vs

1.THE JOINT REGISTRAR Co-Operative Societies, Coimbatore.

2.The Administrator/ Secretary, K 1764 Vedapatti Primary Agricultural Co -Operative, Vedapatti Post, Coimbatore- 641 007. … Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records leading to the impugned proceedings of the 1st Respondent made in See.Ma. 5230 / 2025/Ve2 dated 29.12.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose the petitioner’s revision petition in accordance with law on merits by providing due opportunity within a stipulated time For petitioner : Mr.N.Naganathan For Respondents For R1 : Mr.M.Muthuswamy, Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.C.Jayaprakasam, Government Advocate

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed praying to quash the proceedings of the 1st Respondent made in See.Ma. 5230 / 2025/Ve2 dated 29.12.2025 and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to dispose the petitioner’s revision petition in accordance with law on merits by providing due opportunity within a stipulated time

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as intermediate employee in the second respondent society in the year 1993 and she was working in the said post till 1995. Thereafter, she served as Attendar from 1996 ot 1998 and was promoted as Cashier in the year 1999. While so, elected members of the second respondent society committed misappropriation of funds in the second respondent society. Therefore, the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies ordered for Section 81 enquiry against the elected officer bearers. After due enquiry, criminal prosecution was initiated against the President, Secretary and Manager of the second respondent society. Surcharge proceedings was also initiated by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies against 18 persons including the petitioner. On that basis, the petitioiner was issued charge memo and the petitioner gave explanation on 09.05.2003. However, the second respondent issued show cause notice alleging that there were financial loss while advancing gold jewel loans to non genuine persons. After conducting enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 18.11.2003. Subsequently the petitioner’s husband was continuously taking treatment from various hospitals for various health ailments. However, ultimately the petitioner made revision under Section 153 of Cooperative Societies Act before the first respondent. The first respondent rejected the revision petition on the ground that the revision has to be filed within 90 days. After 21 years, the same cannot be entertained.

Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would further submit that right from 2002 to 2025, the petitioner’s husband is continuously taking treatment from various hospitals during various period. The petitioner is the only care taker to take care of the petitioner’s husband, thereby revision was filed before the first respondent. Hence, the power of condoning the delay is very much available to the first respondent and instead of exercising the power, rejecting of the petition is not sustainable one. Accordingly, he prayed for appropriate orders.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was removed from service in the year 2003 on the allegation of misappropriation of funds. After lapse of 21 years, she preferred revision under Section 153 of Cooperative Societies Act before the first respondent. However, as per Section 153 of the said Act, the period of limitation is 90 days for filing such revision. Therefore, he payed for dismissal of ths writ petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.

6. Thou