Dismissed

The Board of Directors, Kozhipally Service Co-Operative Bank v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operatives (General)

Kerala HC5 Dec 2018WP(C)/727/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged the Joint Registrar's order initiating an inquiry under Section 65 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act against a co-operative bank. The court held it was not sitting in appeal and could not adjudicate factual grounds for the inquiry, dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking quash of the inquiry order and declaration of malafides was dismissed.

The Board of Directors, Kozhipally Service Co-Operative… — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, KOZHIPPALLY SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.E.167, KOZHIPPALLY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 691, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.K.G.KURIAKOSE.

¶8

2 K.G.KURIAKOSE PRESIDENT, THE KOZHIPPALLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.E.167, KOZHIPPALLY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 691.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVES (GENERAL) OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE (GENERAL),KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 030.

¶12

2 THE INQUIRY OFFICER [ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL)],OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL), KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 691.

¶13

BY SRI. K.P. HARISH, SR. GOVT.PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The 1^st petitioner is the Board of Directors and the 2^nd petitioner is the President of Kozhippally Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, which is a Society registered under the provisions of

¶19

the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and

¶20

the rules made thereunder. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the

¶21

Constitution of India, seeking a writ of

¶22

certiorari to quash Ext.P1 order dated 23.11.2017 of the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar, whereby an

¶23

inquiry under Section 65 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act has been ordered in the working of the said Society, for the matters enumerated therein, by appointing the 2^nd respondent Inquiry Officer. The petitioners have also sought for a declaration that Ext.P1 order of inquiry issued by the 1^st respondent is tainted with malafides oblique motives, without application of mind and thus the same is without any legal backing and cannot withstand the

¶24

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶25

¶26

scrutiny of law.

¶27

On 10.01.2018, when this writ petition

¶28

came up for admission, the learned Senior Government Pleader was directed to file statement. This Court granted an interim stay of

¶29

all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 for a period of two weeks. The said interim order, which was extended from time to time is still in force.

¶30

A counter affidavit has been filed by the

¶31

1^st respondent opposing the reliefs sought for in

¶32

this writ petition. Along with the counter affidavit, a copy of the inquiry report of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies is

¶33

placed on record as Ext.R1(a). It was after

¶34

considering the said report that the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar invoked his

¶35

jurisdiction under Section 65 of the Act and

¶36

issued Ext.P1 order. A copy of the relevant pages

¶37

of the minutes book is also placed on record as Ext.R1(b).

¶38

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶39

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the

¶41

petitioners and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶42

The learned counsel for the petitioners

¶43

would submit that it is absolutely without any valid reason that the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar has issued Ext.P1 order invoking his powers under Section 65 of the Act. The learned counsel would also submit that before issuing Ext.P1 order, the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar has to arrive at a satisfaction as to the grounds necessitating the issuance of such an order. The learned counsel would point out that regarding purchase of land and building, permission has already been granted by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, vide Ext.P4 order dated 11.01.2016, and as such, the 1^st respondent is not justified in invoking his powers under Section 65 of the Act by issuing Ext.P1 order.

¶44

The learned Senior Government Pleader,

¶45

after making reference to the averments in the

¶46

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶47

¶48

counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1^st

¶49

respondent and also Ext.R1(a) inquiry report of the Assistant Registrar, would contend that no interference is warranted on Ext.P1 order.

¶50

Having considered the submissions made by

¶51

the learned counsel on both sides, this Court finds that the power of the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar to issue Ext.P1 order invoking the powers under Section 65 of the Act is not under challenge in this writ petition. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶52

is that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar was not justified in invoking his powers by issuing an order like Ext.P1. This Court, in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not sitting in appeal over Ext.P1 order

¶53

of the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar. The adjudication of the factual issues as to the grounds stated in Ext.P1 order falls outside the scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the

¶54

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶55

¶56

Constitution of India.

¶57

Ext.R1(a) report of the Assistant Registrar would show that it was after considering the materials

¶58

on record that the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar

¶59

arrived at a prima facie conclusion that an inquiry under Section 65 of the Act has to be conducted on the working of the Society for the matters enumerated therein. It is thereafter that

¶60

the 1^st respondent Joint Registrar has issued Ext.P1 order. In such circumstances, this Court finds absolutely no grounds to interfere with Ext.P1 order invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶61

In the result, this writ petition fails and the same is accordingly, dismissed.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

ANIL K.NARENDRAN,JUDGE

¶64

AV/10/12

¶65

WP(C).No. 727 of 2018

¶66

¶67

APPENDIX

¶68

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶69

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.CR.P(1) 638/17 DATED 23.11.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶70

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.C.R.P(1) 9843/14 DATED 19.08.2015 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶71

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF VALUATION CERTIFICATE BEARING NO.KEISCO/VAL/519/2015/95 DATED 04.07.2015.

¶72

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.C.R.P(1) 7725/15/K.DIS DATED 11.01.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶73

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶74

EXHIBIT R1(A): TRUE COPY OF THE INQUIRY REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.

¶75

EXHIHIT R1(B): TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF MINUTES BOOK.

The Board of Directors, Kozhipally Service Co-Operative Bank v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operatives (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Board of Directors, Kozhipally Service Co-Operative Bank v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operatives (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hassan V.M Vs the Chalakudy Taluk Primary Co-Operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank

C.D.Chacko @ Sunny Vs Government of Kerala

Rense George @ Rense Varkey Vs Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

The Managing Committee Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Mohanan Velayudhan Vs Inchiany Service Co-Operative Service Co-Operative Bank

M/S. Hotel Ashoka Inn Vs State of Kerala