Facts
The 1st respondent, P. Edison, served as the Secretary of the appellant Co-operative Society and retired on 30.06.2024
Source reference: p. 2Upon retirement, the Society withheld a portion of his terminal benefits (totaling Rs. 9,24,354/-) alleging financial loss caused by his failure to initiate execution proceedings for title deed pledge loans during his tenure from 2013 to 2019
Source reference: p. 2The 1st respondent challenged this withholding via a Writ Petition (W.P.No.41319 of 2025). The Writ Court, in an order dated 04.02.2026, ruled in favor of the 1st respondent
Source reference: p. 1, 4The Society filed this Intra Court Appeal (Writ Appeal) challenging that order
Source reference: p. 1Issues
1. Whether a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable against a Co-operative Society regarding service disputes and terminal benefits?
Source reference: p. 3, 42. Whether the Writ Court can adjudicate disputed issues of fact involving financial loss and negligence without a statutory inquiry?
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
a Co-operative Society not funded by the Government is not a "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution, making it generally immune to writ jurisdiction
Source reference: p. 3Full Bench ratio in K. Marappan vs. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Namakkal, 2006 (4) CTC 689, which establishes that writ petitions are not maintainable against Co-operative Societies when statutory remedies exist
Source reference: p. 4Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, provides a statutory remedy of Revision for aggrieved employees
Source reference: p. 4Reasoning
The Court reasoned that the dispute involved complex factual allegations regarding financial loss and the failure to file execution petitions within the twelve-year limitation period
Source reference: p. 2-3Such "disputed issues" cannot be resolved by a Writ Court under Article 226 through a "roving enquiry"; they require an examination of original documents and evidence
Source reference: p. 3The Court emphasized that since the Society is not a "State" under Article 12, the 1st respondent was mandated to exhaust the alternative statutory remedy provided under Section 153 of the Act of 1983 before approaching the High Court
Source reference: p. 3-4Consequently, the Writ Court erred in entertaining the petition and directing the settlement of benefits while these factual disputes remained unadjudicated by the competent authority
Source reference: p. 4Holding
The Court allowed the Writ Appeal and set aside the order dated 04.02.2026 in W.P.No.41319 of 2025
It held that the Writ Petition was not maintainable
Source reference: p. 4The Court granted liberty to the 1st respondent to approach the competent Revision Authority under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, directing that such a revision be decided on its merits expeditiously. No costs were awarded
Source reference: p. 4-5Original Court PDF
The AdministratorvsP.Edison
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in