THE MANAGEMENT, DD 584, AYYAMPALAYAM FARMERS SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES LTD. Vs. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE TAMIL NADU SHOPS AND ESTABLISHMENT ACT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the appellate authority under the Shops and Establishment Act namely the first respondent allowing the appeal filed by the second respondent in the Writ Petition under Section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947.

(2.) The petitioner is a cooperative society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act. The petitioner society is also running two fair price shops namely shop No.1 and 1A from 2006. The second respondent was the salesman of the fair price shops to supply the essential commodities/goods to the ration card holders and for maintaining the bills and accounts. On 14.12.2006 a Special Flying Squad visited the fair price shops No.1 and 1A in the presence of the second respondent who was the salesman at that time and verified the stock and accounts including bills and ration cards. Without proper entries in cards substantial quantity of rice and sugar from shop No.1 and 1A were found to have been sold. For the misconduct of the second respondent, he was placed under suspension and later disciplinary proceedings was initiated against him by the petitioner. Charge memo was issued against the second respondent on 26.12.2006. Since explanation was offered by the second respondent denying the charges, Cooperative Sub Registrar was appointed as Enquiry Officer. Based on the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer to the petitioner and based on the findings, the second respondent was terminated from service after issuing the second show cause notice to the second respondent on 03.04.2007. The second respondent filed an appeal before the first respondent under Section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act in TNSE Appeal No.4 of 2007. The appellate authority, however, set aside the order of punishment. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner management.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the charges against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature. The second respondent who was working as sales man has sold huge quantity of commodities without proper corresponding entry in the books and ration cards. The learned Counsel also relied upon the explanation offered by the second respondent himself to the effect that the second respondent could not make entries in the 'B' register as well as ration cards because of the non-availability of Packer/Weighman and because of the huge crowd of the consumers. The first respondent came to the conclusion that charges against the second respondent have bene specifically denied by him and that therefore, no punishment can be imposed beyond the collection of value of the commodities found to be deficient.