W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI W.A(MD)No.522 of 2021 and C.M.P(MD)No.2300 of 2021 R.Gnanasekaran ... Appellant / Petitioner Vs. 1.The Additional Registrar, Revisional Authority under Section 153 of Cooperative Societies Act, Additional Registrar (Sales Planning and Development), Office of the Registrar of Societies, Kilpauk, Chennai – 10. 2.The Special Officer, M.D.Special 71, Aranmanaipudur, Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank, Aranmanaipudur, Theni District. ... Respondents / Respondents 1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the learned Judge in W.P(MD)No. 4758 of 2011 and allow the writ petition in full. For Appellant : Mr.Mohammed Imran for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino Special Government Pleader for R.1 Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam for R.2 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.) The unsuccessful writ petitioner is before us. 2.The writ petitioner, who is the appellant herein, was appointed as an appraiser in the respondent Co-operative Bank on 10.12.1997. He was dismissed from service vide order dated 05.12.2005. Questioning the same, he filed W.P(MD)No.11660 of 2005. The said writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 06.07.2007, granting him liberty to avail alternative remedy. Instead of filing a revision before the authority under Section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, the appellant 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 chose to file CMA before the Principal District Judge, Theni. Subsequently, the said appeal was withdrawn as not pressed on 13.03.2008. Thereafter, revision was filed before the authority under Section 153 of the Act. The revision was dismissed as belated. Challenging the same, the appellant filed an M.P in W.P(MD)No.11660 of 2005 seeking extension of time. The said MP was dismissed. Challenging the same, the appellant filed W.A(MD)No.271 of 2010. Before the Hon'ble Division Bench the appellant gave an undertaking that he would not claim any back wages from the date of dismissal. In view of the undertaking given by the appellant, the writ appeal was disposed of on 22.04.2010 in the following terms: “6.Having regard to the fact that nearly five years have lapsed after the order of removal, dated 05.12.2005, we are of the view that by directing the revisional authority to entertain and dispose of the revision expeditiously, the rights of the parties can be sub-served. With that view, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Registrar (Co-operative Societies), dated 10.08.2008 in Na.Ka.No.71103 of 2008 Sa.Pa.1 and direct the Registrar (Co-operative Societies) to entertain the appellant's revision questioning the correctness of the order of removal of the respondent, dated 05.12.2005, and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 law, after giving due opportunity to the appellant as well as the respondent. While passing final orders, in the event of the Registrar (Co-operative Societies) deciding to interfere with the order of removal dated 05.12.2005, he shall apply the undertaking extended by the petitioner in paragraph 5 of his affidavit dated 21.04.2010, extracted above, and pass suitable orders. The Registrar (Co-operative Societies) shall take all endeavour to pass final orders expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks from the date of filing of revision by the appellant. The appellant is directed to file the revision, along with a copy of this order, within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” Thereafter, the revisional authority entertained revision and allowed the same vide order dated 31.08.2010, in the following terms: “Miz&- nkny fz;l jPh;t[fspd;go ,r;rPuha;t[ kD mDkjpf;fg;gl;L> kDjhuiu epue;jug; gzp ePf;fk; bra;J vjph; kDjhuh; tHq;fpa mtUila 05.12.2005e; njjpa Miz ePf;fut[ bra;ag;gl;L kDjhuUf;F cldoahf rq;fj;jpy; eif kjpg;ghsuhf gzpakh;j;j Miz tHq;fg;glntz;Lk; vd;Wk; Mizaplg;gLfpwJ. brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w kJiuf; fpis nky;KiwaPL (MD) vz;. 271/2010 ehs; 22.04.2010 md;W tHq;fpa jPh;g;gpd; mog;gilapy; kDjhuh; epue;jug; gzp ePf;fk; bra;ag;gl;l ehspypUe;J ,e;j Mizg;go kPz;Lk; gzpakh;j;jk; bra;ag;gl;L gzpapy; nrUk; ehs; tiuapyhd ,ilg;gl;l 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 fhyj;ij rk;gskpy;yh tpLg;g[f; fhykhf fzf;fpy; vLj;Jf; bfhs;s ntz;Lk; vd;Wk; ,e;j ,ilg;gl;l fhyj;Jf;F kDjhuUf;F ahbjhU epjpg;gyDk; nfhuf;TlhJ vd;Wk; Mizaplg;gLfpwJ.” 3.Termination order was set aside and the appellant was ordered to be reinstated in service. However, back wages were denied. Aggrieved by the denial of back wages, the appellant filed W.P(MD)No.4758 of 2011. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge on 06.01.2021 by applying the principle of “No work no pay”. Aggrieved by the same, this writ appeal has been filed. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant strongly contended that the undertaking given by the appellant was only to the extent of giving up of back wages for the period commencing from the date of dismissal of the writ petition till the date of reinstatement. He would argue that the appellant is entitled to back wages for the period from the date of termination till the date of dismissal of the writ petition on 06.07.2007. According to him, the learned single Judge had not properly construed the terms of his undertaking. He prayed for grant of relief. 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 5.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Bank submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge deserves to be sustained. 6.We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. 7.We do endorse the stand of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant had given up his claim for back wages only for the period from 06.07.2007 till the date of reinstatement and that he had not given up his claim for the preceding period. However, two aspects operate against the appellant’s claim. 8.Firstly, when the appellant file W.P(MD)No.11660 of 2005 questioning the termination order dated 05.12.2005, the said writ petition was dismissed nearly two years later, on 06.07.2007, as not maintainable. The appellant ought not to have filed the writ petition at all in the first instance. The appellant ought not to have invoked the writ jurisdiction in the first instance and should have straightaway filed a revision before the competent authority under Section 153 of the Act. For the fault 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 committed by the appellant in pursuing a remedy that was intrinsically not maintainable, the Management cannot be fastened with liability. 9.Secondly, as rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for the bank, the appellant had nowhere pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that he was not gainfully employed elsewhere. It is a well settled principle in Labour jurisprudence that back wages can be denied if the delinquent employee was gainfully employed during the relevant period. Whether the employee was gainfully employed elsewhere or not is a fact within the exclusive knowledge of the delinquent. We carefully went through the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The appellant has nowhere pleaded that he was not gainfully employed elsewhere. 10.Even though we do not subscribe to the reason assigned by the learned single Judge and we do uphold the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the principle of “no work no pay” will not be applicable, still, for the twin reasons mentioned above, we decline to interfere. 7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 11.This Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [G.R.S., J.] [R.K.M, J.] 23.01.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA To 1.The Additional Registrar, Revisional Authority under Section 153 of Cooperative Societies Act, Additional Registrar (Sales Planning and Development), Office of the Registrar of Societies, Kilpauk, Chennai – 10. 2.The Special Officer, M.D.Special 71, Aranmanaipudur, Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank, Aranmanaipudur, Theni District. 8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.522 of 2021 G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J. AND R.KALAIMATHI , J. MGA W.A(MD)No.522 of 2021 23.01.2026 9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis