Alagarsamy A v. The Registrar Of Co-Operative Societies

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.02.2026 CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI A.Alagarsamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies 170 Periyar EVR High Road Kilpauk Chennai - 10.

2.The Administrator Virudhunagar District Central Co-operative Bank Limited No.104/1 Madurai Road Virudhunagar - 1.

3.R.Velvizhi 4.R.Sundareswari 5.P.Karnan ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first and second respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Manager from the actual eligible date in par with other eligible candidates of 2010 batch, as per the seniority list dated 23.10.2025, whom were already promoted to the post of Assistant Managers, with all monetary benefits from that actual date 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Ravichandran For R1 : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.D.Shanmuga Raja Sethupathy

ORDER

The petitioner is working as Assistant in the second respondent Bank. He ought to have been promoted as Assistant Manager. However, without promoting this petitioner, the respondents 3 to 5 have been promoted as Assistant Manager. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ought to have been promoted as per the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bimlesh Tanwar Vs. State of Haryana and others reported in (2003) 5 SCC 604. However, without considering the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respondent Bank has erroneously given promotion to the respondents 3 to 5. According to him, the second respondent Bank has revised the 2/5

seniority and placed the petitioner in rank No.13 and the respondents 3 to 5 in rank Nos.24, 25 & 26. Though the seniority list has been revised, it has not been effected and the petitioner has not been promoted.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that the promotion has been effected based on the roster system. However, he admits that the petitioner is entitled for promotion as per the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bimlesh Tanwar Vs. State of Haryana and others reported in (2003) 5 SCC 604. Further, he points out that the third respondent, who has already been promoted, has not been served with a notice in this writ petition.

4.Considering the relief sought for in this writ petition, notice to the private respondent is dispensed with. The respondent Bank is bound by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court sited supra. In the event, if the promotion has been provided to the private respondents as against the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that needs to be revised by the respondent Bank, after providing sufficient 3/5

opportunity to the private respondents. However, the respondent Bank shall revise the seniority list and effect the same,within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

27.02.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes gns To 1.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies 170 Periyar EVR High Road Kilpauk Chennai - 10.

2.The Administrator Virudhunagar District Central Co-operative Bank Limited No.104/1 Madurai Road Virudhunagar - 1.

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI,J gns 27.02.2026 5/5