Disposed

Jeyanthi v. the Deputy Registrar of

Madras HC11 Aug 2023WP/20121/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order for recovery of dues via certiorari, holding it not maintainable as an appeal lies to the Tribunal. The petition was finally disposed of by directing the petitioner to deposit the remaining balance within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to deposit the remaining amount to the credit of the second respondent within four weeks; writ petition disposed.

Jeyanthi Vs the Deputy Registrar of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.08.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶7

Jeyanthi ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, (Credit), Kuralagam, Chennai-108 2.The Madras Customs Employees Cooperative Society Rep. by its Manager, 60, Rajaji Salai, Customs House, Chennai-1 ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India p raying to issue Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent dated 19.03.2008 in Na.Ka.5410/2006/Sa.Pa.1 and quash the same.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nissar Hussain for Mr.I.Kowser Nissar

¶10

For Respondents For R1 : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.A.Selvendran

¶11

1/4

¶12

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

¶13

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order

¶16

passed by the first respondent dated 19.03.2008, thereby ordered to recover a sum of Rs.11.20,631/-.

¶17

Heard, the learned counsel appearing on either side.

¶18

On perusal of records, revealed that the impugned order was

¶19

passed under Section 87(1) of Tamilnadu Cooperative Societies Act. Therefore, the writ petition is not at all maintainable and only an appeal would lie before the Tribunal. However, this Court entertained the writ petition and granted stay on condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5.5 lakhs to the credit of the second respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner had deposited Rs.5.5 lakhs on 30.08.2013.

¶20

Now the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶21

petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the remaining amount also as per the order dated 19.03.2008.

¶22

2/4

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶25

Considering the above submission made by the learned

¶26

counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit the remaining amount after deducting the amount which was already deposited by the petitioner to the credit of second respondent, within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the auction to recover the said amount in the manner known to law.

¶27

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶28

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

11.08.2023

¶30

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

¶31

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶33

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶34

lok

¶35

¶36

1.The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, (Credit), Kuralagam, Chennai-108

¶37

2.Manager,

¶38

The Madras Customs Employees Cooperative Society Rep. by its 60, Rajaji Salai, Customs House, Chennai-1

¶39

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶40

W.P.No.20121 of 2013

¶41

11.08.2023

¶42

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jeyanthi v. the Deputy Registrar of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeyanthi v. the Deputy Registrar of

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

Tmt.P.Thirumalai Achi, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

M.Ganesan, Vs the Commissioner of Police

The Management Vs the Deputy Secretary to

A.K.Pradeep Kumar, Vs the Judicial Magistrate

B.Ambalatharasu, Vs the Judicial Magistrate

G.Gnanavel Vs the Government of Tamilnadu