Disposed

P.K.Unni v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Jul 2019WP(C)/14939/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged expulsion from a cooperative society. The Court noted the existence of alternative remedies filed by the petitioners. It declined to adjudicate merits at this stage and directed the Registrar to dispose of the pending complaint expeditiously, ensuring the Registrar determines its own jurisdiction under the relevant Act and Rules.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; Registrar directed to take up pending complaint and dispose of it after hearing, with liberty to petitioners to push contentions before that Authority.

P.K.Unni Vs State of Kerala — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.14939 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 P.K.UNNI, AGED 75 YEARS S/O. C.GOVINDAN NAIR, LAKSHMI VIHAR, PUDUPPARIYARAM P.O., PALAKKAD KERALA 678 731.

¶8

2 P. MOHANAN, AGED 76 YEARS S/O. K.P.DAMODARA PANICKAR, SREEPADAM, PUDUPPARIYARAM P.O., PALAKKAD KERALA 678 731.

¶9

SRI.R.DIVAKARAN SRI.BINOI GEORGE (CHERUKARA) SRI.RAMESH .P

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶12

2 THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JAWAHAR SAHAKARANA BHAVAN, DPI JUNCTION, THYCADU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.

¶13

3 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES FOR INDUSTRIES, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTER, BEHIND CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD 678 001.

¶14

4 THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT EX-SERVICEMEN CO-OPERATIVE METAL WORKS LIMITED (EX-S11), INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD 678 731, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY.

¶15

5 THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE, THE PALAKKAD DISTRICT EX-SERVICEMEN CO-OPERATIVE METAL WORKS LIMITED (EX-S11), INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD 678 731, REPRESENTED BY THE CONVENER.

¶16

SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SRI.A.V.RAVI SMT.C.S.SHEEJA, SR.G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.14939 of 2019

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioners, who claim to be the members of the fourth respondent - Society, allege that the said Society has removed them from its primary membership without following due procedure and in complete violation of Rule 16(3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules (for short 'the KCS Rules').

¶21

The petitioners impugn Ext.P11 communication received from the Society, wherein they have been notified that their membership has been cancelled and their share value has been kept ready for repayment. The petitioners through their learned counsel, Sri.R.Divakaran, allege that, as is clear from Ext.P11, none of the ingredients of Rule 16(3) of the KCS Rules have been followed and therefore, that the first petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 request for enquiry as also an adjudication of his dispute before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. They pray that Ext.P11 be struck down; or in the alternative, that Ext.P3 be directed to be taken up and disposed of.

¶22

In response, Sri.N.Reghuraj, the learned counsel appearing for the Society, submits that Ext.P11 cannot be subjected to a challenge before this Court since the petitioners have, concededly, invoked their alternative remedies. He, however, adds that Ext.P11 has been issued after following all

¶23

WP(C).No.14939 of 2019

¶24

¶25

necessary procedure under the KCS Act and Rules and therefore, prays that this writ petition be dismissed.

¶26

Smt.C.S.Sheeja, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents submitted that Ext.P11 does not make it clear if the procedure under Rule 16(3) of the KCS Rules have been complied with. She says that these issues can certainly be considered by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies while disposing of Ext.P3.

¶27

Taking note of the afore submissions and since I see that the petitioners have already approached the Registrar through Ext.P3, I deem it appropriate not to enter into the merits of Ext.P11 at this stage but to leave liberty to the petitioners to pursue all their contentions before the said Authority.

¶28

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the second respondent - Registrar of Co-operative Societies to take up Ext.P3 and dispose it of, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as well as to the Society, as expeditiously as is possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶29

I clarify that even though I have not considered the merits of any of the contentions of the petitioners, the Registrar will certainly decide his competence in the matter from the touchstone of Section 69 of the KCS Act as well as Rule 176 of

¶30

WP(C).No.14939 of 2019

¶31

¶32

the KCS Rules and then take a proper decision in the manner as afore directed.

¶33

Needless to say, if the Registrar feels that this is a dispute that comes under Section 69 of the KCS Act, necessary orders shall be issued to the petitioners so that they can then present the matter before the competent Arbitration Court in terms of the provisions of the said Act; reiteratingly clarifying that if the Registrar feels that this is a matter that can be considered under Rule 176 of the KCS Rules or any of the other provisions of the Act, then he shall do so in terms of law without any avoidable delay.

¶34

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶35

Stu

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

WP(C).No.14939 of 2019

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶41

EXHIBIT P1	THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC 2784/2019 DATED 7.2.2019
EXHIBIT P2	THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC 5872/2019 DATED 14.3.2019.
EXHIBIT P3	COPY OF THE COMPLAINT REQUESTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE SECRETARY UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT DATED 20.4.2019.
EXHIBIT P4	THE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD
EXHIBIT P5	THE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 12.4.2019.
EXHIBIT P6	THE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.4.2019.
EXHIBIT P7	THE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.4.2019.
EXHIBIT P8	THE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE SENT TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ON 7.5.2019
EXHIBIT P9	THE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 10.5.2019.
EXHIBIT P10	THE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 10.5.2019
EXHIBIT P11	THE LETTER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS COMMUNICATING THE EXPULSION OF THE PETITIONERS FROM THE PRIMARY MEMBERSHIP DATED 21.5.2019

¶42

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶43

//TRUE COPY//

¶44

P.A TO JUDGE.

P.K.Unni v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.K.Unni v. State of Kerala

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

Rajeevan K. Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

Thomas P.J. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Limited

K.K.Joseph Vs the Authorized Officer, Under the Sarfaesi Act, Federal Bank Ltd.

Raju Lukose Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Jabbar K.P. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

M.S.Anil Vs the Joint Registrar (General) of Co-Operative Societies