MOHAMMED MUSTAFA Vs. PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE (CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL) NAGERCOIL AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OP SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner was employed as a Peon in Manakavilai Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Limited, Kanyakumari District. On 17.11.1997, the 2nd Respondent directed the Extention Officer, Thiruvattar to enquire into the irregularities under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 (shortly as "the Act"). The Extention Officer looked into various accounts and also examined the concerned parties and submitted a report dated 21.08.1998, alleging that loss was caused to the Society by the employees of the Bank including the Petitioner.

(2.) According to the Extention Officer, loss was caused in six heads and the Petitioner was responsible for the loss in some of the transactions under Head Nos. 2,3 and 6. The Extention Officer found in his enquiry that the Petitioner was responsible for causing loss to the tune of Rs. 84,788/-. Based on the said report, the 2nd Respondent issued a show cause notice dated 24.03.1999 under Section 87 of the Act, as to why the aforesaid amount could not be realised from the Petitioner. The aforesaid show cause notice was issued to 7 employees including the Petitioner. All the employees starting from Secretary to Peon were issued show cause notice. After getting explanation from the Petitioner, the 2nd Respondent passed the impugned order dated 03.09.1999 under Section 87 of the Act, stating that the Petitioner caused loss to the tune of Rs. 84,788/- and he was directed to pay the same with interest. The 2nd Respondent did not examine any witness and his order is only based on the report of the Extention Officer submitted under Section 81 of the Act.

(3.) The Petitioner preferred appeal in C.M.A.CS. No. 28 of 2000 to the 1st Respondent under Section 152 of the Act. The 1st Respondent rejected the appeal and upheld the order of the 2nd Respondent in its order dated 16.12.2003. The Petitioner has sought to quash the order dated 16.12.2003 made in C.M.A. Cs. No. 28 of 2000 and also to quash the order dated 03.09.1999 of the 2nd Respondent.