E. Devadoss vs The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and The Special Officer Tiruvallur District Consumer Wholesale Store

M. Jaichandren, J.—This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the

records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 27.12.2010, and quash the same. It has been stated that the petitioner

was working as a Salesman in Tiruvallur District Consumer Wholesale Store, Tiruvallur. While so, charges had been framed against the petitioner

stating that he had caused loss to the Tiruvallur District Consumer Wholesale Store, due to stock deficit, to the tune of Rs. 1,56,579/- and for

misappropriation of funds, to the tune of Rs. 1,05,352.15/-.

It has been further stated that, based on the said charges, enquiry proceedings had been conducted and it was found that the charges levelled

against the petitioner had been proved. Thereafter, the second respondent had passed an order, dated 23.6.2010, imposing the punishment of

increment cut for two years, with cumulative effect, on the petitioner.

It has been further stated that, challenging the said order, the petitioner has filed a revision petition before the first respondent, u/s 153 of the

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, and the said order had been confirmed by the revisional authority, by the impugned order, dated

27.12.2010.

The main contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that another employee, who was junior to the petitioner and who had been charged for

causing loss to the Tiruvallur District Consumer Wholesale Store, by way of stock deficit, had been promoted. However, the petitioner had been

imposed with the punishment of increment cut for two years, with cumulative effect. Therefore, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated

27.12.2010, is liable to be set aside.

Per contra, the learned counsels appearing for the respondents had submitted that the petitioner had given a statement, on 8.10.2002, admitting

that he was guilty of the charges levelled against him. However, an enquiry had been conducted, based on the charges levelled against the

petitioner, following the procedures established by law. Since, the petitioner had been found guilty, he had been imposed with the punishment of

increment cut for two years, with cumulative effect. The revisional authority, the first respondent herein, had confirmed the order passed by the

second respondent, by his order, dated 27.12.2010.

The learned counsels appearing for the respondents had further submitted that the findings given by the second respondent, in his order, dated

23.6.2010, stating that the petitioner is guilty of the charges levelled against him, had not been challenged, by way of a revision petition filed before

the first respondent, u/s 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. Therefore, the said findings had become final.

The learned counsels appearing for the respondents had further submitted that the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, before the first

respondent, is that a person, who was junior to the petitioner, had been promoted, even though he was guilty of similar charges. However, such a

contention cannot be accepted, in view of the fact that the petitioner had admitted his guilt, by way of a statement made by him, on 8.10.2002. As

such, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed.

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondents, and on a perusal of the records

available, it is seen that certain charges had been levelled against the petitioner, for stock deficit, and for misappropriation of funds belonging to the

Tiruvallur District Consumer Wholesale Store. The petitioner had admitted his guilty by way of statement, made on 8.10.2002. However, an

enquiry had been conducted based on the charges levelled against the petitioner. Based on the report of the enquiry officer, the second respondent

had passed the order, dated 23.6.2010, imposing the punishment of increment cut for two years with cumulative effect. The petitioner had

challenged the said order before the first respondent, by way of a revision petition, filed u/s 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act,

1983.

It is also noted that the findings of the second respondent that the petitioner was guilty of the charges levelled against him had not been

challenged and therefore, it had become final. It is further noted that the petitioner had admitted the guilt in the statement made by him, on

8.10.2002. Even otherwise, it is not open to the petitioner to claim that the punishment imposed on him should be set aside for the reason that the

person, who was junior to the petitioner and who had also been charged with similar charges, had been given promotion. In such circumstances,

this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not in a position to show sufficient cause or reason to interfere with the order of the first

respondent, dated 27.12.2010. As such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P. Nos. 1 and 2

of 2011 are closed.