Kavali Venkateswara Rao Vs the State of Ap

THE SPECIAL OFFICER PERSON IN CHARGE, THE NELLORE DISTRICT P S T EMPLOYEES - COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ACHARI STREET, HEAD POST OFFICE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRIET, NELLORE - 524001.

¶16

THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, NEAR COLLECTORATE BUILDING, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT,

¶17

2

¶18

NELLORE - 524001.

¶19

THE DIVISIONAL COOPERATIVE OFFICER, OLD JUBLIE HOSPITAL, MADRAS BUSSTAND SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE - 524001.

¶20

THE MANAGER, POST AND TELEGRAPH EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE - 524001

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of the respondents in paying the withheld Deducted amount of Rs. 24,43,044/- and Rs. 82,911/- (Rs. 25,25,995/-) from the petitioners retirement benefits and receivable amount of Rs. 13,08,249/ totaling an amount of Rs. 38,34,204/- as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith pay the petitioner the entire retirement benefits without withholding / deducting any amount and pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to pay the receivable amount of Rs. 13,08,249/(Rupees Thirteen lakhs Eight thousand Two hundred Fourty Nine) from the total retirement benefits and pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.GUDISEVA VENKATA SAI KIRAN

¶27

3

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.Y KOTESWARA RAO

¶30

2.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

4

¶33

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶34

W.P.No.20581 of 2025

¶35

O R DE R:

¶36

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondents in withholding the receivable retirement benefits of the Petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶37

The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:

¶38

The Petitioner had joined in Nellore District Postal and Telegraph Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., as an attender in the year 1998. Subsequently, Petitioner was promoted as Junior Assistant on 01.09.2004 and later as Manager on 01.06.2017. After being promoted as Manager, the Petitioner sought for reversion to the post of Junior Assistant on account of health reasons. Petitioner continued to work as Junior Assistant from 30.11.2021 till the date of his retirement, i.e., 31.10.2024. It is stated that though Petitioner had retired from service on 31.10.2024, retirement benefits of the Petitioner amounting to Rs.38,34,204/- were not being paid to the Petitioner.

¶39

5

¶40

It was submitted that pursuant to an enquiry, a surcharge

¶41

order was passed vide Rc.No.486/2021/C dated 30.01.2023 for an amount of Rs.24,43,044/- under Section 60(1) of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nellore & the Surcharge Authority. Questioning the same, Petitioner filed O.A.No.06 of 2024 before the A.P Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada (for short ‘the Tribunal’) under section 76(1) of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and questioned the surcharge order. The Tribunal after referring legal provision and case law, set aside the order of surcharge vide order dated 29.01.2025.

¶42

Inspite of the fact that surcharge order was set-aside, the present writ petition is filed on the ground of withholding of retirement benefits without any basis. This Court after hearing the Petitioner had issued notice on 05.08.2025 and after service of notice, the writ petition was adjourned on 10.12.2025, 12.12.2025 and 19.12.2025 to enable the learned counsel for Respondent Nos.3 and 6 to get instructions. However, the learned counsel expresses his inability to get instructions.

¶43

6

¶44

5. Heard learned counsel on either side.

¶45

The surcharge order issued against the Petitioner was set aside by the Tribunal and the operative portion of the order reads as under:-

¶46

“13. From the above judgment it is further clear that the surcharge shall commence with proper show cause notice with all the allegations. In the absence of show cause notice, it can be said that there is no basis for enquiry contemplated under section 60 of APCS Act, 1964. For all the reasons above, the surcharge against the appellant is baseless i.e., without show notice and the explanation and it is liable to be set aside. Factually also the income tax liability imposed on the Society cannot be the result of inaction on the part of the appellant, but the Society, represented by the PIC, failed to satisfy the authorities in explaining the amounts credited to the Society Bank account. Accordingly, the point is answered.

¶47

In the result, appeal is allowed and the surcharge order in RC.No.486/2021/C, dated 30.01.2023 is set aside. No costs.”

¶48

In the light of the above, withholding the retirement benefits by the Respondents is without any basis. The retirement benefits are construed as a property under Article 300A of Constitution of India and withholding the same cannot be sustained, except in accordance with law.

¶49