1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.04.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.4599 of 2011 S.Jeyasankar : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kilpauk, Chennai-10. 2.The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Virudhunagar Region, Collector Office Campus, Virudhunagar. 3.The Special Officer, R.K.11, Virudhunagar District Co-operative Printing Press Ltd., Sulakkarai Post, Virudhunagar. : Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide Na.Ka.7069/10/sa pa, dated 17.09.2010 and quash the same and consequently, direct the second respondent to take the revision petition dated 15.09.2010 on his file and decide the case on merits and in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For Respondents : Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition challenging the impugned order of the second respondent dated 17.09.2010, in and by which, the second respondent rejected the revision filed by the petitioner on the ground that it has been filed beyond the time prescribed under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Compositor in the third respondent Co-operative Printing Press on 25.05.1995 on daily wage basis. Later, the petitioner along with seven other employees had filed a petition before the Labour Inspector seeking to regularize their service in the third respondent Printing Press. The third respondent, in pursuant to the direction given by the Labour https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Inspector, regularized the service of the petitioner by Board Resolution dated 06.08.2000. 5. However, on certain flimsy grounds, the third respondent passed an order dated 02.04.2008, terminating him from service without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity to him. The petitioner, thereafter, made a request to the third respondent to consider his case sympathetically and to reinstate him in service. However, since there was no response, he has filed a revision before the first respondent challenging the order of the third respondent. The said revision was returned on the ground that the petitioner has to approach the second respondent, who is the competent authority to decide the revision under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. Thereafter, the revision has been presented before the second respondent. Since there was a delay, in view of the reason stated above, it has been explained in the grounds of revision. However, without considering the same, the second respondent has rejected his revision on the ground that it has not been filed within the time prescribed for filing a revision. The petitioner, therefore, has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition challenging the said order. 6. The facts disclosed above would indicate that the order of termination dated 02.04.2008 was passed by the third respondent. The petitioner ought to have filed a revision under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 before the second respondent. Instead, the petitioner seems to have filed a revision before the first respondent, who is not the competent authority. Therefore, the first respondent has returned the papers stating that the revision has to be preferred before the second respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the revision before the second respondent. In the grounds of revision, the petitioner has explained the reasons for the delay. However, the same has not been considered by the second respondent. 7. No doubt, under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, a revision has to be filed before the second respondent, within 90 days from the date of the decision or order. However, the said provision does not say that beyond the prescribed time, a revision cannot be filed. Absolutely, there is no prohibition to file a revision beyond the prescribed time. In such circumstances, Section 5 of the Limitation Act will come to the rescue of the person, who files such revision beyond the prescribed time. 8. Taking such view, I am of the considered view that the second respondent could have considered the delay that has been explained by the petitioner in his revision. The second respondent failed to do so. He has simply rejected the revision on the ground that it has been filed beyond 90 days as prescribed under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. 9. In view of the above stated position, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order of the second respondent dated 17.09.2010 and accordingly, set aside and the matter is remitted to the second respondent to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, without reference to the delay. Since I am satisfied that the delay has been explained, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the revision on merits and in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 accordance with law, as stated already, without any reference to the delay. The petitioner is directed to re-present the returned papers to the second respondent, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the second respondent is directed to pass orders, as stated above, within six weeks thereafter. 10. The Writ Petition stands allowed in the above terms. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CO ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR SML To 1.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kilpauk, Chennai-10. 2.The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Virudhunagar Region, Collector Office Campus, Virudhunagar. 3.The Special Officer, R.K.11, Virudhunagar District Co-operative Printing Press Ltd., Sulakkarai Post, Virudhunagar. 1CC TO MR. D. SENTHIL, ADVOCATE, SR: 15612: 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 15814: DM:2011::MAY:05:: Order made in W.P.(MD)No.4599 of 2011 Dated:- 28.04.2011 3P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/