T.K.N.Saravanan vs The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
CNR:{HCMD010819432025}
and
WMP(MD) Nos.14814, 14815 & 23521 of 2025
T.K.N.Saravanan,
Clerk,
DD 496, K.C.Pattai,
Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society,
Kodaikanal Taluk,
Dindigul District.
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
O/o. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative
Societies,
Collector Office (PO),
Dindigul Region,
Dindigul.
2. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative
Societies,
O/o. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative
Societies,
11/223, Raja Nagar,
Lakshmi Nagar Extension,
Palani, Dindigul District.
__________
Page 1 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
3. The Administrator,
DD496/K.C. Patti, Primary Agricultural Co-
Operative Credit Society,
K.C.Patti post,
Perumalpatti via,
Kodaikanal Taluk,
Dindigul District.
..Respondents
PRAYER: S-2. Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the
Impugned order of the 3rd Respondent vide his impugned
proceedings Nil dated 30.06.2025 and quash the same as illegal and
consequently direct the Respondents to disburse the retirement
benefits of the petitioner by treating him as retired on 30.06.2025
within the time stipulated by this Honble Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.H. Mohammed Imran
For Respondents :Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff
Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
The petitioner is an employee of DD496/K.C. Patti,
Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society, Dindigul. He was
__________
Page 2 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
placed under suspension on certain irregularities, on 30.06.2025 and
he was not permitted to retire from service. Aggrieved over the
same, the petitioner has approached this Court.
2.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for
the respondents raises a preliminary objection to the maintainability
of the writ petition, relying on the decision of the Hon’ble larger
Bench of this Court in K.Marappan Vs. the Deputy Registrar of Co-
operative Societies, Namakkal Circle, Namakkal and another,
reported in 2006 (4) CTC 689. He further submits that the petitioner,
an employee of the Co-operative Society has been placed under
suspension as per the Bye-law of the Society and as such, the service
conditions of the employees of the Society are also governed by its
Bye-law. According to the learned Special Government Pleader, the
petitioner’s entitlement to gratuity arises under the Society’s Bye-
law and that any grievance with regard to violation of Bye-law must
be pursued through the statutory remedy, under Section 153 of the
__________
Page 3 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, before the Joint Registrar of
Co-operatives and not before this Court. The relevant portion from
the Marappan’s case , relied on by the learned Special Government
Pleader is extracted as under:-
‘(vi) The bye-laws made by a Co-operative Society
registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies
Act, 1983 do not have the force of law. Hence, where a
Society cannot be characterised as a ‘State’, the service
conditions of its employees governed by its bye-laws
cannot be enforced through a writ petition’.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by
referring to Section 79(2)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative
Societies Act, 1983 contends that the gratuity amount cannot be
attached or subjected to any other process of a Court or other
authority. The learned counsel has also relied on the judgment of the
Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 234 of 2020,
dated 12.10.2020 and submits that the Division Bench has
distinguished the claim for gratuity, which has been guaranteed
__________
Page 4 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
under Byelaw and Statute under Section 79 of the Tamil Nadu Co-
operative Societies Act and held that, where a statutory violation is
established, this Court may exercise its jurisdiction under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. The Division Bench in the above
said Judgment has passed an order as under:-
8.In order to resolve this preliminary question of maintainability of
the writ petition, it would be appropriate to extract paragraph 21 of
the Full Bench decision in K.Marappan's case (supra), which is
gainfully reproduced hereinunder:-
“21. From the above discussion, the following
propositions emerge:
i. If a particular co-operative society can be
characterised as a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12
of the Constitution (applying the tests evolved by the
Supreme Court in that behalf), it would also be ‘an
authority’ within the meaning and for the purpose of
Article 226 of the Constitution. In such a situation, an
order passed by a society in violation of the bye-laws can
be corrected by way of Writ Petition;
ii. Applying the tests in Ajay Hasia it is held
that a cooperative society carrying on banking business
cannot be termed as an instrumentality of the State within
the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution;
__________
Page 5 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
iii. Even if a society cannot be characterised as
a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the
Constitution, a Writ would lie against it to enforce a
statutory public duty cast upon the society. In such a case,
it is unnecessary to go into the question whether the
society is being treated as a ‘person’ or ‘an authority’
within the meaning of Article 226 of the Constitution and
what is material is the nature of the statutory duty placed
upon it and the Court will enforce such statutory public
duty. Although it is not easy to define what a public
function or public duty is, it can reasonably said that such
functions are similar to or closely related to those
performable by the State in its sovereign capacity.
iv. A society, which is not a ‘State’ would not
normally be amenable to the writ jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution, but in certain
circumstances, a writ may issue to such private bodies or
persons as there may be statutory provisions which need
to be complied with by all concerned including societies. If
they violate such statutory provisions a writ would be
issued for compliance of those provisions.
v.Where a Special Officer is appointed in
respect of a Co-operative Society, which cannot be
characterised as a ‘State’ a writ would lie when the case
falls under Clauses (iii) (iv) above.
__________
Page 6 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
vi. The bye-laws made by a co-operative society
registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies
Act, 1983 do not have the force of law. Hence, where a
society cannot be characterised as a ‘State’, the service
conditions of its employees governed by its bye-laws
cannot be enforced through a Writ Petition.
vii. In the absence of special circumstances, the
Court will not ordinarily exercise power under Article 226
of the Constitution of India when the Act provides for an
alternative remedy
viii.The decision in M. Thanikkachalam v.
Madhuranthagam Agricultural Co-operative Society, 2000
(4) CTC 556, is no longer good law, in view of the
decision of the SevenJudge Bench of the Supreme Court in
Pradeep Kumar Biswas case and the other decisions
referred to here before.”
9.On a perusal of Clause (iv) of Para 21 as quoted above, it is
evident that a writ petition has been held to be maintainable if a
complaint is made with regard to violation of statutory provisions or
for compliance of such provisions. On the other hand, Clause (vi)
thereof indicates that the service conditions of employees that are
governed by bye-laws cannot be enforced through a writ petition.
10.Having compared and assessed the rival submissions, we find
that the respondent petitioner had come up before this Court for the
__________
Page 7 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
enforcement of his rights which stand protected under Sections 78
and 79 through a Statute, namely, The Tamilnadu Co-operative
Societies Act, 1983. The said provisions are reproduced
hereinunder:- “
‘78. Provident Fund.- (1) A registered society not being
an establishment to which the Employees' Provident
Funds and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952 (Central
Act XIX of 1952) applies, may establish a provident fund
for the benefit of its employees to which shall be credited
all contributions made by the employees and the society in
accordance with the by-laws.
(2) A provident fund established by a registered society
under sub-section (1) shall be invested in the financing
bank, but shall not -
(a) be used in the business of the society;
(b) form part of the assets of the society;
(c) be liable to attachment or be subject to any other
process of any court of other authority.
79. Gratuity Fund.- (1) A registered society not being an
establishment to which the Payment of Gratuity Act. 1972 (Central
Act 39 of 1972) applies, may provide by its by-laws for payment of
gratuity to the employees at such rates and on such conditions as may
be specified in the by-laws and such society may establish a gratuity
fund or make other arrangements for the purpose.
__________
Page 8 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
(2) A gratuity fund, if any, established by a registered society under
sub-section (1) shall be invested in the financing bank, but shall not-
(a) be used in the business of the society;
(b) form part of the assets of the society;
(c) be liable to attachment or be subject to any other proves
of any court or other authority.”
11.The order that was impugned in the writ petition was passed by the
Deputy Registrar calling upon the Society not to permit the respondent
petitioner to retire from service, the consequence whereof is that the
respondent petitioner will not be able to receive his benefits including
Provident Fund and Gratuity that are statutorily controlled by
Sections 78 and 79 of the 1983 Act.
12.In our considered opinion, this part of the service condition of the
respondent petitioner being subject to a statutory provision, is such a
service condition which is governed by a Statute and therefore,
paragraph 21 (iv) of the Five Judges Full Bench judgment in the case
of K.Marappan would directly apply on the facts of the present case.
This is not a case where the bye-laws of the Society or the service
conditions contained therein are being only sought to be enforced. The
relief claimed in the writ petition is squarely on the above count and
therefore, the respondent petitioner was entitled to maintain a writ
petition with regard to his claim of Provident Fund and Gratuity,
which is governed by the provisions of Sections 78 and 79 of the 1983
Act aforesaid’
__________
Page 9 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
The learned counsel further submits that the above said decision has
been followed by learned Single Judges of this Court in various
occasions.
4. In reply, the learned Special Government Pleader by
relying upon the subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Division
Bench in W.A. No. 3513 of 2023, dated 21.09.2026 submits that the
Division Bench took note of the order of the Division Bench of this
Court in W.A. No. 234 of 2020, dated 12.10.2020, in the light of the
decision of the larger Bench of this Court in Marappan’s case and
held as under:-
17. In the context of the present case, the direction in Clause
(vi) to Para 50 of the judgment in Marappan’s case would
squarely apply. The larger Bench in unequivocal terms
reiterated that the service conditions of the employees of the
cooperative society are governed under its byelaws, which are
approved by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies under the
provisions of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act. Once
the byelaws relating to the service conditions are approved,
__________
Page 10 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
then no writ would lie to redress the service related grievance
of an employee under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
…
22. Regarding exhausting of alternative remedy contemplated
under the Statute, the Apex Court emphasises that entertaining
a writ petition and adjudication of disputed facts are not
desirable, which may result in causing prejudice to either of
the parties. The disputed facts are to be adjudicated based on
the documents in original and evidences to be produced. The
High Court in exercise of the powers of judicial review under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot conduct a
roving enquiry, merely based on the affidavit or selected
copies of documents. Such disputed facts cannot be
adjudicated, as there is likelihood of causing miscarriage of
justice in the event of undertaking any such adjudication. This
exactly is the reason why the Constitutional Courts have time
and again reiterated that an aggrieved person, at the first
instance, has to exhaust the alternative remedy contemplated
under the Statute. The factual finding made by the original
authority and the appellate / revisional authority under the
Statute are of greater assistance to the High Court for the
purpose of exercise of judicial review in an effective manner.’
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions made
and also perused the materials placed on record.
__________
Page 11 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
6. The petitioner, a suspended and retired employee of
the Co-operative Society has approached this Court that he was not
allowed to retire from service and the terminal benefits have not
been settled to him. The petitioner claims that as per Section 79(2)
(c) of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983, the gratuity
amount of the Co-operative Society’s employee cannot be attached
or subjected to any other process of a Court or other authority. To
substantiate his contention, the petitioner has relied on the judgment
of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court of this Court in
W.A.No.234 of 2020, dated 12.10.2020.
7. Section 79 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies
Act deals with the gratuity amount of Co-operative Employee, which
is as under:-
79. Gratuity Fund (1) A registered society not being an
establishment to which the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972
(Central Act 39 of 1972) applies, may provide in its by-laws for
__________
Page 12 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
payment of gratuity to the employees at such rates and on such
conditions as may be specified in the by-laws and such society
may establish a Gratuity Fund or make other arrangements for
the purpose.
(2) A Gratuity Fund, if any, established by a registered society
under sub - section (1) shall be invested in the financing bank,
but shall not (a) be used in the business of the society; (b) form
part of the assets of the society; (c) be liable to attachment or be
subject to any other process of any Court or other authority.
8. On the side of the respondents, it is claimed that any
grievance with regard to violation of Bye-law must be pursued
through the statutory remedy under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu
Co-operative Societies Act, before the Joint Registrar of Co-
operatives, for which, they have relied on the judgment of the
Honourable larger Bench of this Court in K.Marappan Vs. the
Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Namakkal Circle,
Namakkal and another, reported in 2006 (4) CTC 689 and the latest
Judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.
__________
Page 13 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
3513 of 2023, dated 21.09.2026.
9. No doubt, the gratuity amount of an employee of the
Co-operative Society is not governed under the Payment of Gratuity
Act and it is as per the Byelaw of the Society with certain
conditions. Moreover, Section 79 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative
Society does not prescribe the mode of payment of the gratuity
amount to the employees of Co-operative Society. It stipulates
guidelines for utilising the amount, which were recovered from the
employees towards gratuity. However, Section 79(2)(c) stipulates a
condition that it would not be liable for attachment or to any other
process of a Court or other authority. Section 79(1) stipulates that
the payment of gratuity of the employees is on such condition as
may be specified by the Byelaw.
10. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to
entertain this writ petition, in the light of the Judgment of the
__________
Page 14 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
Honourable larger Bench in Marappan’s case and the recent
Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 3513 of
2023, dated 21.09.2026. This writ petition is disposed of with the
following directions:-
i. The petitioner shall pursue the statutory remedy under Section
153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies, 1983, before
the competent Joint Registrar.
ii. If the petitioner files an application seeking payment of
gratuity, the Joint Registrar concerned shall consider and
decide it, in the light of Section 79 of the Act, within three
months from the date of its filing.
There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous petitions are closed.
02-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
VRN
__________
Page 15 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
To
1. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies
O/o. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies
Collector Office (PO)
Dindigul Region
Dindigul
2. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies
O/o. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies
11/223, Raja Nagar
Lakshmi Nagar Extension
Palani, Dindigul District
__________
Page 16 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
vrn
Order made in
WP(MD) No. 19293 of 2025
02.11.2026
__________
Page 17 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 04:04:07 pm )