Madras High CourtWP/16141/2005dismissed

T.Thangavelu v. The Director Of Co-Op Audit,

2018-12-11Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.12.2018

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.16141 of 2005 and W.P.M.P.Nos.17579 and 17580 of 2005

1. T.Thangavelu

2. C.Rangasamy

3. N.Kumarasamy

4. C.Shanmugam

5. N.K.Palanisamy

6. P.Velusamy

7. N.Duraisamy

8. O.V.Moorthi

9. O.S.Shanmugam

10. S.Venkateswaran

11. N.Vikramathithan

12. D.Vengudusamy

13. P.S.Yuvarasu

14. P.Palanisamy

15. B.S.Sadasivam

16. N.Jothi

17. R.Devendran

18. M.Abimannan

19. P.Palanisamy

20. R.Krishnasingh 21.P.Sakthivel

22. D.Bhuvaneswaran

23. P.Nallasivam

24. S.Jothilakshmi

25. C.Mani

26. D.Parthiban

27. S.Shanmugasundaram

28. C.Poongodi

29. R.Jaganathan

30. R.Murugarani

31. P.Ananthi

32. A.Kala

33. N.Kaliappan

34. Jhonshirani

35. R.Maheswari

36. K.Mohanasundaram

37. D.Sekar

38. K.Marimuthu

39. A.Thangamuthu

40. S.Saraswathi

41. P.Rajendran

42. D.Thangavel

43. P.Duraisamy

44. A.Chandrika

45. V.Deiva

46. R.K.Subramanian

47. V.P.Dhandapani

48. S.Kasthuri

49. S.Lakshmi

50. T.Jaya

51. M.P.Ponnusamy

52. N.Duraisamy

53. S.S.Ponnusamy

54. P.M.Subramaniam

55. P.Manickam

56. M.G.Subramaniam

57. A.Mohan

58. A.Murugesan

59. K.A.Chockalingam

60. M.Subramaniam ... Petitioners vs.

1. The Director of Co-Op Audit, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board Buildings, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai -5.

2. The Assistant Director of Co-Op Audit, Erode, Erode District.

3. The Deputy Registrar of Co-Op Societies, Erode Circle, Erode.

4. The Deputy Registrar of Co-Op Societies, Gobi Circle, Gobi, Erode.

5. The Special Officer, Ingur Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Ingur Post, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District.

6. The Special Officer, Panangattur Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Iyampalayam Post, Bhavani Taluk, Erode District.

7. The Special Officer, Bramadesam Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Brammadesam Post, Bhavani Taluk, Erode District.

8. The Special Officer, Lakkumananaickkanpatty Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., L.N.Patty Post, Kangayam Taluk, Erode District.

9. The Special Officer, Dhasavanaickkanpatty Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Dhasavanaickkanpatty Post, Kangayam Taluk, Erode District.

10. The Special Officer, Vellakoil Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Vellakoil Post, Kangayam Taluk, Erode District.

11. The Special Officer, Velappannaickanvalasu Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., V.N.Valasu Post, Kangayam Taluk, Erode District.

12. The Special Officer, Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Uthukuli Post, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District.

13. The Special Officer, Nadupatti Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Nadupatti Post, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District.

14. The Special officer, Kambuliyampatty Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Kambuliyampatty Post, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District.

15. The Special Officer, Kilvani Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Mungilpatty, Kilvani Post, Bhavani Taluk, Erode District.

... Respondents PRAYER:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from making Audit objections in their Audit Report in regarding with paying the banks contribution in LIC for Employees Provident Fund. For Petitioners : Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondents : Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, Special Government Pleader(Co-Op)

ORDER

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to forbear the the respondents 1 and 2 from making Audit objections in their Audit Report in regarding with paying the banks contribution in LIC for Employees Provident Fund and pass such further orders.

2.The very relief sought for in the present writ petition in innocuous. There cannot be any negative relief can be granted in a writ petition. The competent authorities, who all are empowered to exercise the powers under the provisions of the statute can never be prevented from exercising their powers in a lawful manner.

3.No writ petition can be entertained, if such a relief is sought for in the absence of any material to show that the authority had acted contrary to the provisions of law. Thus, it is made clear that the authority, if committed any illegality or violations of the provisions of any law, then alone the writ petitioner would get cause for filing a writ petition. 4.On a perusal of the prayer as well as the grounds raised in the writ petition, the writ petitioner has filed the petition with certain apprehensions, which is premature. Thus, it is made clear in the event of passing any orders, affecting the rights of the writ petitioner, the writ petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent Appellate authority and thereafter, the High Court, in accordance with the procedures as contemplated. 5.

In view of the fact that the very relief as such sought for cannot be granted, no further adjudication needs to be entertained in respect of the grounds raised in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as the petitioner has not established any cause for granting the relief and further, the writ petition is also premature. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.