K.Mohan v. The Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Societies

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.10.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN K.Mohan .. Petitioner vs 1.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Sangagiri, Salem District.

2.The Coop. Sub Registrar/Enquiry Officer, Vellarivelli Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Vellarivelli, Edappadi Taluk, 3.S.877, Vellarivelli Primary Agricultural Co-operative Rep. by its Administrator, 4.S.Anandhakumar The Area Manager, 5.P.Venkatesan, The Supervisor, 6.Maheshwaran, The Area Manager, 7.A.Venkatachalam, 1/6

The Supervisor, 9.P.Ravichandran, The Coop. Sub Registrar/Field Officer, 10.S.Manikandan, The Coop Sub Registrar/Field Officer, The 4th to 10th respondents having office at S.877, Vellarivelli Primary Agricultural Co-operative .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to Initiate Departmental proceedings and surcharge proceedings against the 4th to 10th respondents by disposing the written representation made by the petitioner on 28.01.2025.

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Hemalatha For Respondents : Mr.J.Ravindran, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Ms.E.Ranganayaki (for R1 & R2) Additional Government Pleader Mr.M.Muthusamy, (for R3) Government Advocate Mr.C.Kulandaivel, (for R5)

O R D E R

2/6

Heard Ms.R.Hemalatha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General for Ms.E.Ranganayaku, learned Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2, Mr.M.Muthusamy, learned Government Advocate for R3 and Mr.C.Kulandaivel, learned counsel for R5.

2.The petitioner seeks for initiation of action against respondents No.4 to 10 for having negligently acted in not supervising the 3rd respondent Society. The plea of the petitioner is that in the 81 enquiry that was conducted by the 2nd respondent, the private respondents had been found to have played a part in the malversation of funds of the 3rd respondent Society.

3.It is the plea of Ms.Hemalatha that only the petitioner has been proceeded with before the criminal Court, Departmentally as well as in surcharge proceedings initiated under Section 87 whereas the respondents No.4 to 10 have been let scot-free.

4.On the day of admission, Mr.J.Ravindran had taken notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2 and sought time to file a counter. 5.Today, when the matter was taken up, he has filed a counter on behalf of 1st respondent, which is adopted by the 2nd respondent. 6.Insofar as the plea of Ms.Hemalatha that 87 enquiry has not been 3/6

initiated, Mr.Ravindran points out that respondents No.4 to 8 are employees of the Salem District Central Co-operative Bank and respondents No.9 and 10 are Government servants. Hence, they do not come under any of the categories mentioned under Section 87 of the Act. Therefore, actions could not be initiated under that provision as against the aforesaid persons.

7.Insofar as disciplinary proceedings are concerned, he points out that action was initiated against the respondents No.9 and 10 and have been punished with cut in increment for their lack of supervision over the 3rd respondent Society. With respect to the 10th respondent, he states that disciplinary action had been recommended and on that basis charge memo under Rule 17-B of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules had been initiated and the 10th respondent had been visited with the punishment of cut in increment for six months without cumulative effect.

8.Insofar as the respondents No.4 to 8 are concerned, he points out that disciplinary proceedings had already been initiated and they are pending. He points out that disciplinary proceedings have been initiated and the private respondents have not been let scot-free. 9.I have gone through the records as well as the counter. 4/6

10.Since action has already been initiated against the respondents No.4 to 8, no further orders are necessary other than directing the respondents to conclude the same within the earliest possible time. Insofar as the respondents No.9 and 10 are concerned, action has already been taken, therefore, no further direction is necessary in this regard. Hence, this writ petition stands closed. No costs. 08.10.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order vs To 1.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Sangagiri, Salem District.

2.The Coop. Sub Registrar/Enquiry Officer, Vellarivelli Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Vellarivelli, Edappadi Taluk, 3.S.877, Vellarivelli Primary Agricultural Co-operative Rep. by its Administrator, V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.

vs 5/6

08.10.2025 6/6