V.L.(Spl) 213, Sathampakkam Primary Vs the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies

¶1

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03.04.2025

¶4

CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶5

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶6

V.L.(SPL)213, Sathapakkam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Rep. By its President, E.Duraisamy, M/52 S/o.Ellappan, Sathampakkam Village Appellant in Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District. .. W.A.No.461 of 2023

¶7

The Management

¶8

V.L.(Thani)213, Sathambakkam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Appellant in Wallaja Taluk, Vellore District. .. W.A.No.465 of 2023

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies Vellore Region, Vellore Vellore District.

¶11

Respondents in 2. K.Venkataraman .. W.A.No.461 of 2023

¶12

K.Venkataraman

¶13

The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies Vellore Region, Vellore Respondents in Vellore District. .. W.A.No.465 of 2023

¶14

Prayer in W.A.No.461 of 2023: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 27.01.2023 in W.P.No.17656 of 2020; and

¶15

Prayer in W.A.No.465 of 2023: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 27.01.2023 in W.P.No.11309 of 2020.

¶16

Page 1 of 8

¶17

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

¶18

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶19

For the Appellants : in both W.As	Mr.C.Prakasam
For the Respondents in W.A.No.461 of 2023 :	Mrs.M.Geetha Thamaraiselvan Special Government Pleader for R1
	Mr.Balan Haridas for R2
For the Respondents in W.A.No.465 of 2023 :	Mr.Balan Haridas for R1
	Mrs.M.Geetha Thamaraiselvan Special Government Pleader for R2

¶20

COMMON JUDGMENT

¶21

(Judgment of the Court was authored by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) These appeals have been directed against the order passed by

¶22

the Writ Court dated 27.01.2023 made in W.P.Nos.11309 and 17656 of 2020.

¶23

That the respondent K.Venkataraman was an employee of the appellant Society, against whom, disciplinary proceedings was initiated by the Society and ultimately, the respondent employee had been removed from service. As against the order of removal, he filed a revision before the Revisional Authority under Section 153 of

¶24

the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983, where, the punishment of removal from service has been modified into a minor

¶25

Page 2 of 8

¶26

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

¶27

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶28

punishment with a direction to reinstate the employee. Not satisfied with the same, a further review has been filed under Section 154 of the Act of 1983, where also, the order passed by the Revisional Authority has been confirmed.

¶29

Aggrieved over the same, the employee filed the writ petition in W.P.No.11309 of 2020 and aggrieved over the order passed by the Revisional Authority, as confirmed by the authority who exercise the power to review, the Society filed the writ petition in W.P.No.17656 of 2020. Both these writ petitions came to be disposed by the common order of the Writ Court dated 27.01.2023, by which, the writ petition filed by the employee was allowed and the writ petition filed by the Society was dismissed.

¶30

As against the common order dated 27.01.2023, these

¶31

appeals have been directed at the instance of the appellant Society.

¶32

When we have taken these appeals for final hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the employee respondent in both the appeals has stated that during the pendency of these appeals, the Society, having accepted the order passed by the Writ Court, which is impugned herein, in fact, has reinstated the employee by the

¶33

Page 3 of 8

¶34

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

¶35

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶36

order dated 28.02.2023 and he has also produced a copy of the said

¶37

order in the additional typed-set of papers, which reads thus:

¶38

Page 4 of 8

¶39

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

¶40

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶41

This position has not been controverted by Mr.C.Prakasam , learned counsel for the appellant Society. Though the learned counsel for the appellant Society wants to justify that merely because this order has been passed, reinstating the employee because of the contempt proceedings, the right of the appellant Society in these appeals cannot be denuded.

¶42

We are not impressed with the said submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant Society for the simple reason that on perusal of the language, which is used in the order of reinstatement dated 28.02.2023, the appellant Society, after having fully satisfied and accepted the order passed by the Writ Court without any contention or without retaining any right of the appellant to adjudicate the issue before this Court in these appeals, has passed the order of reinstatement simpliciter and therefore, against the said compliance of the order, once again, the appellant Society cannot turn around and make out a cause before this Court.

¶43

Hence, we do not see any plausible reason to proceed further to adjudicate this issue in these writ appeals. Resultantly, both these writ appeals fail and therefore, these writ appeals are

¶44

Page 5 of 8

¶45

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

¶46

W.A.Nos.461 & 465 of 2023

¶47

dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.4322 and 4340 of 2023 are closed.

¶48

(R.S.K., J.) (A.D.M.C., J) 03.04.2025

¶49

Neutral Citation:Yes/No