Madras High Court
C.Sivasamy vs The Registrar on 25 June, 2019
Author: M.Sathyanarayanan
Bench: M.Sathyanarayanan, B.Pugalendhi
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.06.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P.(MD)No.23560 of 2018
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.21359 and 21360 of 2018
C.Sivasamy ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Registrar,
Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies,
170, E.Ve.Ra.Road,
Dr.Radhakrishnan Nagar,
Chennai-600 106.
2.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
3.The Joint-Registrar,
O/o the Joint-Registrar Co-operative Societies,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
4.The Deputy Registrar,
O/o the Co-operative Societies Aruppukkottai Circle,
Aruppukkottai,
Virudhunagar District.
5.The Inspector of Police,
CCIW, Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
6.The President,
Q.891, T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture
Co-operative Society,
T.Veppankulam,
V.Nangoor Post, Kariyapatti Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
7.The Secretary,
Q.819, T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture
Co-operative Society,
T.Veppankulam,
V.Nangoor Post, Kariyapatti Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
8.R.Ravichandran
9.A.Rajinikanth
10. R.S.R.Venkatachalam ... Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records
relating to impugned auction notice dated 13.11.2018 which passed
by the sixth and seventh respondents and quash the same as illegal
and consequently direct the sixth and seventh respondents to stop
all further proceedings relating to the public auction which fixed on
28.11.2018 by the sixth and seventh respondents to auction the
jewels which keep under the custody of the sixth and seventh
respondents.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Senthilkumar
For Respondents : Mr. A.K.Baskarapandian
Special Government Pleader
for R.1 to R.7
: Mr.M.Kumar
for R.10
: No Appearance
for R.9
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN,J) This Writ Petition styled as a Public Interest Litigation is filed by the petitioner, who claims to be a poor farmer and also a member of Q.891, T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District and according to him, for agricultural purposes, he pledged jewels and availed the following loans:
Sl.No. Jewel Loan Number Loan Amount (Rs.) 1 1017 22,000 2 1018 60,000 3 1021 1,50,000 4 1022 1,52,000 5 1073 39,000 6 1170 5000
2. It is also the case of the petitioner that recently, the Government of Tamil Nadu had also announced the waiver in respect of agricultural loans, which were availed by the small and medium farmers and though the petitioner had approached the ninth respondent very many times, as to the said scheme available, http://www.judis.nic.in 4 no proper response is forthcoming. The petitioner also became aware of the fact as to the misconduct on the part of the private respondents, in having clandestinely taken the jewels pledged by various farmers to the seventh respondent Society. It is also the specific case of the petitioner that the jewels pledged by him had already been taken clandestinely and disposed of by the private respondents especially the eighth and ninth respondents.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the eighth respondent, being the former President and the ninth respondent being the former Secretary of the said Society, clandestinely removed and taken away the jewels, which were pledged by the poor farmers and despite the said criminality being brought to the knowledge of the concerned Authorities, there was no proper response and he is ready to pay the loan amount, provided the jewels pledged by him are returned to him.
4. Per contra, Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents has drawn the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit filed by the http://www.judis.nic.in 5 fourth respondent and would submit that with regard to the criminality on the part of the respondents 8 and 9 is concerned, a criminal complaint was lodged on the file of C.C.I.W. CID and a case in Cr.No.01/2016 was registered on 07.09.2016 for the commission of offences under Sections 406, 408, 471, 477(a), r/w 34 I.P.C., and the investigation is on and simultaneously, surcharge proceedings were also initiated against the respondents 8 and 9 for the purpose of recovery of Rs.93,13,886/- from the said respondents and the ninth respondent made a challenge to the said proceedings by filing a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.18598 of 2017 and interim orders are in operation.
5. It is also pointed out by the learned Special Government Pleader that in the light of the irregularities of the said Society, a Board was also superseded and the proceedings were also put to challenge by the eighth respondent in W.P.(MD)No.15961 of 2017 and though the writ petition has been entertained, as on date, no interim orders are in operation. Insofar as the case of the petitioner is concerned, it is the submission of the learned Special Government Pleader that the petitioner had availed jewel loans and he committed default in payment of the loans and therefore, auction http://www.judis.nic.in 6 proceedings were initiated against him and the petitioner under the guise of filing this writ petition styled as a Public Interest Litigation is intending to stall the auction proceedings initiated against him to recover the loans. Since the content made by him is not a bonafide one, he prays for dismissal of this Writ Petition with exemplary costs.
6. The learned Counsel appearing for the tenth respondent would submit that he was the earlier Secretary of T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society and on the request made by the ninth respondent, who was a jewel appraiser, he took out 91 boxes of jewels from the Society, which were pledged by the farmers and handed over to him and the said boxes have not been returned by the ninth respondent and he is also facing the prosecution as one of the accused in the above said Crime No.01 of 2016.
7. This Court heard the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed before this Court.
http://www.judis.nic.in 7
8. With regard to the clandestine disposal of the jewels on the part of the eighth and ninth respondents, admittedly, a criminal case was initiated against them and investigation is going on and insofar as the enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co- Operative Societies Act is concerned, the eighth respondent has filed a writ petition and also obtained interim orders. The primordial submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that his jewels are also one of the items mooted by the eighth and ninth respondents. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that even for the sake of arguments, if the petitioner is ready to repay the loans, there may not be any possibility of the Society to redeem his jewels. Such a contention made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner was seriously disputed by the learned Special Government Pleader by stating that in the enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co- Operative Societies Act, such kind of cases were identified and insofar as the petitioner is concerned, his jewels are available intact and the same is only in the custody of the eighth respondent and if the petitioner would have repaid the loan amount on time, the jewels pledged by him would have been returned to him and the http://www.judis.nic.in 8 present Writ Petition is filed as a Public Interest Litigation only to stall the auction proceedings.
9. The question whether the jewels pledged by the petitioner had also been clandestinely disposed of by the eighth and ninth respondents is a disputed question of fact and it is also pertinent to point out at this juncture that with regard to the alleged misdeeds of respondents 8 and 9, a case in Cr.No.01/2016 was registered by C.C.I.W. CID, on 07.09.2016, for the commission of offences under Sections 406, 408, 471, 477(a), r/w 34 I.P.C., and the investigation is under progress. The counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent would also disclose the enquiry notice under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operatives Act, which has also been issued to the respondents 8 and 9 and surcharge proceedings were also initiated for recovery of Rs.93,13,886/- from the eighth and ninth respondents and making a challenge to the said proceedings, ninth respondent filed W.P.(MD)No.18598 of 2017 and obtained interim orders and steps are already taken by the concerned respondents to vacate the said interim orders. http://www.judis.nic.in 9
10. The petitioner also did not seriously dispute the availment of the loans and the dues payable by him and though the petitioner is a farmer and carrying on agricultural operations, he has pledged the jewels and availed loans and the fact remains, he could not repay the loans for the reasons known to him and though the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner made his last effort by making a submission that if time is granted, the petitioner is ready to repay the loan amount, however, this Court is not inclined to accept his contention on the ground that this Writ Petition was entertained on 28.11.2018 and interim orders are also in operation postponing the auction and there is a specific direction to adjourn the auction beyond 06.12.2018 and accordingly, the auction date was adjourned and despite that, the petitioner was not in a position to settle the loan amount.
11. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, no interference is warranted in the auction proceedings initiated by the seventh respondent.
12. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also http://www.judis.nic.in 10 dismissed. However, taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations and also the criminal case in Cr.No.1 of 2016, the fifth respondent is directed to file a status report taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the allegations especially with regard to the stealing of the jewels pledged by the farmers for availing agricultural loans. The fifth respondent is directed to file a status report as to the progress shown in the investigation of the case in Cr.No.1 of 2016.
13. Call on 16.07.2019. Status report of the fifth respondent by then.
[M.S.N.J.,] [B.P.J.,]
25.06.2019
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
ssl
To
1.The Registrar,
Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies,
170, E.Ve.Ra.Road,
Dr.Radhakrishnan Nagar,
Chennai-600 106.
2.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
http://www.judis.nic.in 11
3.The Joint-Registrar, O/o the Joint-Registrar Co-operative Societies, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
4.The Deputy Registrar, O/o the Co-operative Societies Aruppukkottai Circle, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.
5.The Inspector of Police, CCIW, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
6.The President, Q.891, T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society, T.Veppankulam, V.Nangoor Post, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
7.The Secretary, Q.819, T.Veppankulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Society, T.Veppankulam, V.Nangoor Post, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
http://www.judis.nic.in 12 M.SATHYANARAYANAN,J.
AND B.PUGALENDHI,J.
ssl W.P.(MD)No.23560 of 2018 25.06.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in