Dismissed

D.Perumal v. Salem District Central

Madras HC20 Dec 2022CRP/1176/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the confirmation of surcharge proceedings against a bank employee. The Court upheld the lower court's order but directed respondents to adjust the amount already repaid by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition is dismissed. Respondents are directed to deduct the amount already repaid by the petitioner while recovering the surcharge amount.

D.Perumal Vs Salem District Central — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.12.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

D.Perumal

.. Petitioner

Vs.

Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Represented by its Secretary, G.Saravanabhavan, Cherry Road Office, Salem-7,

¶11

K.Ramasamy (Deceased), Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Yercaud Branch, Yercaud Post, Salem District.

¶12

N.Dhanapal, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Vazhapadi Area Office, Vazhapadi Post, Salem Taluk, Salem District.

¶13

M.A.V.Muthusamy (Deceased) Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶14

R.Ramakrishnan, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Bazaar Street, Salem-1.

¶15

Page 1 of 9

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶18

V.Saraswathi

¶19

Bharatha Devi

¶20

M.Duraisamy

¶21

G.Venkatesan

¶22

K.S.Arthanari, Supervisor,

¶23

Salem Area Office, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Salem-1.

¶24

A.Janaki

¶25

V.Lakshinarayanan, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶26

M.Chellappan, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶27

K.Rajappan, Secretary, 152, 2^nd Agraharam, Salem-1.

¶28

K.Gnanasundaram (Deputy Registrar/ Administrative Officer-Retd.), 24, Eda Street, Tiruvarur-610 108, Nagapattinam Quide Millath District.

¶29

S.Kannappan (Deputy Registrar/ Administrative Officer-Retd.), 3, Veerabhathraswami Kovil Street, Cuddalore-607001, South Arcot Vallalar District.

¶30

Page 2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶32

D.Sivaraj, Assistant Secretary-Retd., 408-H, Mullai Nagar, Suramangalam, Salem-5.

¶33

A.Ramamurthy, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Mallur Branch, Mallur Post, Salem District.

¶34

Mari Chetty, Manager, Salem District District Central Co-operative Bank., Dhadhagapatti Branch, Dhadhagapatti Taluk, Salem-5.

¶35

S.Gopalan

¶36

P.Santhanagopalan, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶37

C.Muthuraman, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Women Branch, Fairlands, Salem-16.

¶38

K.Rangasamy, Cashier, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶39

N.Sengodan, Assistant, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Pudhuchattram Branch, Namakkal Taluk, Salem District.

¶40

R.Gopalsamy

¶41

P.Chittan

¶42

Page 3 of 9

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶45

S.Mohammed Ali

¶46

M.Chokkalingam, Manager, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶47

S.Krishnamurthy, Deputy Registrar/ Special Officer, 31, Ground Floor Road Street, Mylapore, Chennai-4.

¶48

A.R.Nachimuthu, Secretary, Sampath Nagar, Erode-1, Periyar District.

¶49

V.Adhikesavan, Assistant Secretary, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶50

S.Devarajan (Deceased), Assistant Secretary, Salem District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Cherry Road, Salem-1.

¶51

Mangaleswari

¶52

Anusuya

¶53

Sathishkumar

¶54

Priya

¶55

Aandal

¶56

Vasantha

¶57

M.Senthilkumar

¶58

M.Raja

¶59

Latha

¶60

.. Respondents

¶61

Page 4 of 9

¶62

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶63

Prayer:-

¶64

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶65

Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to allow the above Civil Revision Petition and set aside the order and decreetal order passed in C.M.A.(C.S)/.No.24 of 1995 on 30.04.2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Salem.

¶66

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Jagadeesan For R1 : Mr.M.R.Raghavan For R2 to R38 : Given up

¶67

ORDER

¶68

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed as against the order and

¶69

decreetal order passed in C.M.A.(C.S)/.No.24 of 1995 on 30.04.2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Salem, thereby confirmed the order of surcharge proceedings initiated as against the petitioner herein.

¶70

The petitioner had joined in the Co-operative Department in the year 1962 in the service of the Salem District Central Co-operative Bank

¶71

as a last grade servant and thereafter promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1978. While he was in service, the surcharge proceedings were initiated by the Special Officer of the Salem District Central Co-operative Bank under Section 87(1) of Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, which culminated in the orders passed under Section 87(1) by the proceedings

¶72

Page 5 of 9

¶73

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶74

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶75

of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies in Na.Ka.No.9226 of 1994 dated 05.05.1995.

¶76

Originally, the surcharge proceedings were initiated as against 33 employees. For initiation of proceedings, they all were served with show cause notices with allegations that there was loss to the Cooperative Bank under three heads totaling in all Rs.7,37,548.91/- from the period 15.12.1988 to 25.06.1990. The gravity of the charge was that the petitioner did not get permission from the higher officials for admitting the cash vouchers, which were issued for the purpose of expenses incurred in the celebrations of Co-operative week. Thereafter, the final order was passed on 05.05.1995, reducing the liability to the tune of Rs.3,87,160.48/- as against five individuals along with the petitioner herein. They preferred an appeal in C.M.A.(C.S).No.24 of 1995 under Section 152 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, on the ground that the impugned surcharge proceedings is untenable, since there was only an Assistant in the office, performing the duties as directed by the superior officers. Therefore, the petitioner had nothing to do with the sanctioning of any funds or for allotting the same to any particular Page 6 of 9

¶77

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶78

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶79

function or project. In fact, the criminal proceedings initiated as against the petitioner for the breach of trust, misappropriation forgery etc, ended in acquittal. Though, the appeal preferred thereon came to be dismissed, the entire liability was fastened on the petitioner herein.

¶80

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that already the petitioner had repaid a sum of Rs.1,85,889/-, which includes the sum relaized through auction of his movable properties in E.P.No.116 of 1991.

¶81

A perusal of records revealed that in order to propagate the

¶82

function of the Co-operative Institution, Co-operative week was celebrated from 15.12.1988 to 25.06.1990. The petitioner, who was functioning as a Senior Assistant in the Bank, drew money from the Bank on the basis of cash vouchers which were issued for the purpose of expenditures during the celebrations. Irregularities were committed in withdrawal of money from the Bank without the permission or concurrence of the higher officials of the Bank to a large extent. Therefore, enquiry was conducted in accordance with provisions under Page 7 of 9

¶83

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶84

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶85

Section 87(1) of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. During the enquiry, 33 employees were issued show cause notice and after completing the enquiry on 05.05.1995, the surcharge order was passed and thereby fixed the liability of Rs.3,87,160.48/-.

¶86

Therefore, the Court below had rightly confirmed the order of the surcharge proceedings and this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Court below. Hence, this revision is liable to be dismissed. However, the respondents are directed to adjust the amount which was already repaid by the petitioner while taking proceedings to recover the surcharge amount from the petitioner.

¶87

Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.

¶88

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

¶89

20.12.2022

¶90

Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No mn

¶91

Page 8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶92

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015

¶93

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

¶94

¶95

¶96

The Principal District Judge, Salem.

¶97

C.R.P.No.1176 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶98

20.12.2022

¶99

Page 9 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

D.Perumal v. Salem District Central

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Perumal v. Salem District Central

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parvathi Vs Boliappan

K. Gopalakrishnan Vs Reynold Vasanthakumar

M.Showkath Ali Vs Kuppusamy

S.Karthikeyan Vs Sivasubramanian

K.S.Mohammed Saleem (Died) Vs K.S.Mohammed Zackriah

Puratchimani Vs Fathima Beevi