- (1.) The writ petitions are filed challenging the order of the first respondent Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, dated 20.5.2002 and the subsequent order of the Co-operative Tribunal, Cuddalore in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2005, dated 27.9.2007 and the order of the first respondent, dated 20.5.2002 and the consequential order of the Tribunal in C.M.A. No. 12 of 2005, dated 24.10.2007 respectively.
(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions are that the petitioner while working as Co-operative Sub Registrar in the State Co-operative Department has retired from service on 28.2.1997. It is stated that during his service, he was working as Sub Registrar (PDS) supervising ration shops at Kattumannarkoil Taluk and he was put in additional charge of about six co-operative societies in the said Taluk. He has also worked as the Special Officer of the second respondent Co-operative bank during 29.2.1992 to 24.8.1995. It is stated that the Government has appointed a Committee to streamline the cadre strength, pay scale and allowances of the employees of Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank and revised scale of pay approved in G.O. Ms. 2(2D)No. 68 Co-operation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 12.11.1993. It is to give effect to the said government order, it is stated that the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Banks were advised to enter into a settlement with the employees under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act and based on that on behalf of the second respondent bank, represented by the petitioner as its Special Officer has signed a settlement before the Labour Officer, Cuddalore on 31.3.1994, for the period from 1.7.1992 to 20.6.1997. It is stated that as per the agreement, the benefits were worked out and the working sheet was approved by the Co-operative Sub Registrar (Arbitration) being the representative of the first respondent and it was based on the same, the amounts were disbursed to the employees.
(3.) The arrears amount paid to the then Secretary and also the Fertiliser Salesman. On the basis of an audit stated to have been effected in 1994-1995, it was noticed that excess amount were paid to the tune of Rs. 11,464.45 in respect of the said two employees and also the objection from the audit regarding the enhanced pay and allowance in respect of a Clerk and an Office Assistant to the extent of Rs. 74,534/- for which the first respondent has passed the impugned order on 20.5.2002 which is the subject matter of dispute in W.P. No. 35621 of 2007. A direction was issued to the petitioner as well as the other three persons including the Secretary and Fertiliser Salesman to remit an amount of Rs. 11,456/- and the share of the petitioner works out to Rs. 2,864/-. That apart, the first respondent has also directed to recover Rs. 74,534/- from the petitioner and four others including the clerk and office assistant, in which the petitioner's share works out to Rs. 14,907/- and in that regard, the total amount for which the petitioner was made liable was Rs. 17,771/-.;