12.In terms of Sections 78 and 79 of the Tamil Nadu
Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, neither the Provident Fund nor the
Gratuity of the petitioner is liable to attachment or could be subjected
to any other process of any Court or other authority and this has been
already confirmed by the order passed by this Court in the case of the
Registrar of Co-operative Societies and others Vs. A.Sengodan
reported in 2019 SCC Online Mad 9298. Having passed an order
permitting the petitioner to retire from service, withholding of pension
and terminal benefits of the petitioner by the respondents would be
meaningless.
3.4 The Single Bench, taking note of Section 79 of the Tamil Nadu
Cooperative Societies Act and relying on an order passed by a Single Bench of
this Court in N. Ravichandran v The Registrar of Cooperative Societies
(Housing)1 and also the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in The
Registrar of Cooperative Societies v A. Sengodan2, holding that the issue is no
longer res integra, and also taking cognizance of the fact that the orders dated
31.08.2015 of the authority had become final, since the same were not appealed
against by the society, allowed the writ petitions, as prayed for.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1 W.P. No.25073 of 2019 decided on 26.07.2021 2 W.A. No.1466 of 2015 decided on 08.02.2019 3/8
W.A. Nos.272 & 274 of 2024
3.5 Thereagainst, the society has preferred the instant writ appeals.
4 According to the learned counsel for the society, even now, the
surcharge proceedings are pending against the workmen and hence, the Gratuity
amount cannot be released to the workmen.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order is in
contravention to Sections 78 and 79 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative
Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short). Apart from that,
the learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of
this Court in Registrar of Co-operative Societies v. A. Sengodan, reported in
2019 SCC OnLine Mad 9298, wherein the Division Bench of this Court has
held that, in the absence of any enabling statutory provisions, a society
cannot withhold the terminal benefits of retired employees.