No power to withhold terminal benefits or recover post-retirement from common cadre employees without prior disciplinary proceedings.

ORDER

Heard Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Om Prakash, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

2.The petitioner herein,who served as the Secretary of the fourth respondent Society was allowed to retire on attaining the age of superannuation by issuing the proceedings bearing No.... dated 30.06.2025 Page 29 issued by the second respondent subject to certain conditions, which are enumerated at paragraph Nos. 2 to 5 of the said proceedings which reads as under:

By imposing the above conditions, the petitioner was allowed to retire from service on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 30.06.2025 and consequently relieved the petitioner from service. It is aggrieved by the said conditions that were imposed in the proceedings of the second respondent dated 30.06.2025, the petitioner approached this Court as the terminal benefits of the petitioner have not been disbursed by the fourth respondent.

Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathy, learned counel for the petitioner contended that the second respondent has no power to direct withholding of the terminal benefits of the petitioner and whatsoever ground as there is no provision that is available under the Tamil Nadu Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Common Cadre Service Rules that would enable the respondents to issue proceedings against common cadre employee for recovery once he is permitted to retire from service.

The learned counsel further contended that the said issue has fallen for consideration before various Division Benches of this Court on nmber of occasions and it was concluded that once a common cadre employee was allowed to retire from service, his terminal benefits cannot be withheld nor any disciplinary proceedings can be initiated or continued against such employee. He further contended that in the instant case, admittedly, the petitioner herein is a member of Common Cadre Service and no disciplinary proceedings have been initiated while he was in service nor after his superannuation. Therefore, no such proceedings. He further submitted that there is no allegation of whatsoever alleging against the petitioner or any misappropriation of any funds, but it is only in connection with discharge of his functions as the Secretary of the fourth respondent Society, which is also a subject matter of the writ petion before this phone in WP.No.15582 of 2025 by the fourth respondent Society and the issue is now pending before the Government.

In the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the conditions imposed in the proceeding dated 30.06.2025 withholding the terminal benefits of the petitioner are arbitrary and liable to be quashed to that extent.

On the other hand, Mr.Om Prakash, learned Government Advocate by taking this Court to the counter affidavit contended that the petitioner is permitted to retire only subject to conditions and in case, if the disbursal of loans to the tune of Rs.29,00,000 and odd is found to be not in accordance the relevant rules. The petitioner will be liable to reimburse the said amount. He also submitted that the issue as to whether the said loan amounts advanced by the fourth respondent Society are eligible for loan waiver or not is now pending for consideration before the first respondent. He also contented that the relief sought in the present writ petition cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by this Court as the petitioner has got an efficacious alternative remedy being an employee of a Society and the relief is sought only against the fourth respondent Society.

This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the entire materials on record.

Admittedly, the petitioner hereub is a member of common cadre service. The conditions of the common cadre employees are governed by Tamil Nadu Primary Agri