R SIVASAMY Vs. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the first respondent Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society, Chengalpattu to pay a sum of Rs.1,95,000/- with interest which is the amount of gratuity withheld by the second respondent, i.e., Metropolitan Transport Corporation Employees Cooperative Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Chennai-600 044, for which the petitioner has made a representation, dated 11.5.2011 to the first respondent with a copy to the second respondent.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that he was the Secretary of the second respondent society and had reached the age of superannuation on 30.4.2011. The fifth respondent in the writ petition was also the Secretary of the Air Force Civilian Employees Cooperative Thrift and Credit Society Limited. He borrowed loan from the third respondent, i.e., Chengalpattu M.G.R. District Cooperative Institutions Employees Cooperative Thrift and Credit Society and Stores Limited and that the petitioner stood as a surety to him. The fifth respondent had committed irregularities while he was working as a Secretary and had misappropriated the funds. He was placed under suspension. He became irregular in repayment of loan borrowed from the third respondent society. On coming to know of the same, the petitioner had requested the third respondent to take necessary action against the fifth respondent for recovery of the amount as he was having both movable and immovable properties in his name. Due to default by the fifth respondent, the appropriate authority took steps to recover the amounts by resorting arbitration under Section 90 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act. The Arbitrator had entertained the claim and by an Award dated 29.6.2007 held that he was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,58,960/-. Thereafter, execution proceedings were initiated in E.P.No.361 of 2007 by the Sale officer who is the fourth respondent. Pursuant to the execution proceedings, the second respondent had withheld a sum of Rs.1,95,000/- to satisfy the arbitration award. Therefore, the petitioner was not paid gratuity. The petitioner sent a representation, dated 11.5.2011 stating that the firth respondent is having sufficient funds and has become crorepathi. There was also surcharge proceedings pending against him. Hence the amount of gratuity and the other benefits payable to him cannot be withheld by the second respondent. IT is in that premises, the writ petition came to be filed.

(3.) HOWEVER, the said judgment only referred to Section 60(g) CPC and Section 13 of the Payment of Gratuity Act. But the said fact overlooks Section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 which reads as follows: