The High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging a surcharge order passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The court held that refusing witness summoning and cross-examination did not violate natural justice as reasons were recorded, and remedies lie under statutory appeal provisions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.2182, 2183 & 2184 of 2024
1.V.Nithyanandam ... Petitioner in W.P.No.2048 of 2024
2.R.Jayakumar ... Petitioner in W.P.No.2049 of 2024 Vs.
1.The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Cuddalore Region, Cuddalore.
2.R.Shivaraj,
The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Cuddalore Region, Cuddalore.
3.The Chennai Metropolitan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Rep by its Deputy Registrar / Administrator, No.50, Ritherdon Road, Veppaeri, Chennai 600 007. ... Respondents in both W.Ps
Prayer in both W.Ps: Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the surcharge order passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.1381/2023/sa.pa dated 19.01.2024 and quash the same.
Page No.1 of 6
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
In both W.Ps
For Petitioners : Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy
For Respondents : Mr.S.Nanmaran, SGP for R1 & R2 Mr.Navinkumar, GA for R3
COMMON ORDER
These Writ Petitions have been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of
Certiorari to call for the records of the surcharge order passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.1381/2023/sa.pa dated 19.01.2024 and quash the same.
2 . Heard Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy, learned counsel for the petitioners,
Mr.S.Nanmaran, learned Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 and
Mr.Navinkumar, learned Government Advocate for the third respondent.
3. Earlier the petitioners have filed Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.8515
& 9916 of 2023, challenging the show cause notice issued to them and in the said Writ Petitions, it has been observed that the petitioners should file their explanation to the notice given and the explanation is not satisfactory, the appropriate authority can conduct an enquiry after giving
Page No.2 of 6
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
a full opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners.
4. Now, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
during the enquiry, the petitioners have filed a petition seeking permission to produce certain documents by some of the witnesses and allow them to cross-examine them. It is further submitted that the said opportunity was not granted to the petitioners and hence the proceedings have been conducted in violation of natural justice.
5. In the impugned order, it is stated that there is no necessity to cross-examine the witnesses for the reasons recorded therein. When the appropriate authority does not deem it fit to summon certain witnesses for the reasons recorded in the order, it cannot be said that the request of the petitioners has not been considered at all. In case the petitioners are aggrieved due to the order passed by the appropriate authority under Section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, they are at liberty to file an appeal challenging the same.
6. When the delinquents filed a petition seeking permission to
Page No.3 of 6
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
summon any of the witnesses to produce certain documents, it cannot be ordered automatically in the name of granting opportunity, unless those documents called for and the summon of the witnesses are necessary for the purpose of the scope of the enquiry and the charges involved therein. When a detailed order has been passed on merits as to why the request of the petitioners is rejected, it is always open to the petitioners to challenge the same in a manner known to law or in accordance with the statutory provisions.
7. In view of the above stated reasons, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
01.02.2024
Index : Yes /No Internet : Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking Neutral Citation : Yes / No gsk
NOTE : The Registry is directed to return the copy of the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.1381 / 2023/ sa.pa dated 19.01.2024 and issue the copy of the order today itself (01.02.2024).
To
Page No.4 of 6
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
1.The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Cuddalore Region, Cuddalore.
2.R.Shivaraj, The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Cuddalore Region, Cuddalore.
3.The Chennai Metropolitan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Rep by its Deputy Registrar / Administrator, No.50, Ritherdon Road, Veppaeri, Chennai 600 007.
R.N.MANJULA, J.
gsk
Page No.5 of 6
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024
W.P.Nos.2048 & 2049 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.2182, 2183 & 2184 of 2024
01.02.2024
Page No.6 of 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the inquiry proceedings violated principles of natural justice by refusing to summon witnesses and allow cross-examination?
Whether the surcharge order passed by the Deputy Registrar is liable to be quashed under Article 226?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V.Nithyanandam
R.Jayakumar
The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Cuddalore Region
R.Shivaraj
The Chennai Metropolitan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
R.N.MANJULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
