Disposed

Sunu George, v. the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Kerala HC26 Mar 2019WP(C)/62/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Ernakulam, entertained a writ petition challenging notices demanding refund of sitting fees. The court directed the petitioner to file objections before the Assistant Registrar, ensuring a hearing is afforded before the Authority concludes proceedings under Section 105 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file objections to notices before 1st respondent Assistant Registrar within two weeks; Authority to afford hearing and conclude within two months.

Sunu George, Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative… — 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 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No. 62 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUNU GEORGE, AGED 45 YEARS VETTIKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANJOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SMT.AMRUTHA SURESH SRI.C.P.SABARI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL),

¶11

VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- 696141.

¶12

2 THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ELECTION COMMISSIONER, 3RD FLOOR, COBANK TOWERS, PALAYAM, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695033.

¶13

3 MANJOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.K 73, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANJOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM686603.

¶14

4 SIBI MATHEW, PULPRAYIL, MANJOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM- 686603.

¶15

5 KADUTHURUTHY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K. 399, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, KADUTHURUTHY P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN- 686604.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.P.C.HARIDAS

¶17

SRI.BIMAL K.NATH-SR.P

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No. 62 of 2019

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner says that he was elected to the Managing Committee of the 3^rd respondent-Society but that it was set aside by the competent Arbitrator through Ext. P3 Award. He says that consequently Exts. P7 and P8 notices have been issued asking him to refund the sitting fees collected by him as a member of the Committee and asserts that this is completely illegal and unlawful.

¶23

The petitioner contends that even though his election has been set aside, actions taken by him while being the member of the Managing Committee of the Society are not automatically effaced and relies on various judgments of this Court and that of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in substantiation of this contention. He, therefore, says that all action pursuant to Exts. P7 and P8 be declared to be illegal and unlawful.

¶24

Sri. Bimal K. Nath, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents, submit that Exts. P7 and P8 were issued because the petitioner had accepted sitting fees even after passing of the Award and that necessary action will be taken by the competent Authority once the petitioner responds to the said notices. He says that all the

¶25

WP(C).No. 62 of 2019 3

¶26

contentions of the petitioner, including that the sitting fee for the period when he was acting as a member of the Managing Committee of the Society cannot be refunded, are matters which the competent Authority will consider, adverting to the various judgments of this Court and that of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶27

On hearing the learned Senior Government Pleader as afore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amounts accepted by his client after Ext. P3 Award, have already been refunded, as is evident from Ext. P9 receipt and therefore, that the only surviving question is whether the amounts collected by him while he was validly acting as a member of the Managing Committee of the Society, prior to Ext. P3 Award, can be recovered. He says that he will approach the competent Authority, in response to Exts. P7 and P8 and will place his objections to it and will also raise all his contentions and prays that the same be directed to be considered by the said Authority in terms of law.

¶28

Taking note of the afore submissions, I order this writ petition and direct the petitioner to file his objections to Exts. P7 and P8 before the 1^st respondent-Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies,Vaikom, Kottayam, within a period of two

¶29

WP(C).No. 62 of 2019 4

¶30

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; in which event, the said Authority will consider the same after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and adverting to all the materials and judgments that he may place before it, as expeditiously as is possible but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶31

I make it clear that while concluding the proceedings pursuant to Exts. P7 and P8, the applicable provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules, particularly Section 105 of the Act will be borne in mind by the said Authority.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

SVP

¶36

WP(C).No. 62 of 2019

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.06.2013 IN W.P(C)NO.14602/2013. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARC.NO.51/2013 ALONG WITH NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ARBITRATION COURT FOR APPEARANCE. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 24.04.2018 IN ARC NO.51/2013. EXHIBIT P4 THE RELEVANT RULE 15 OF THE KCS RULES AS AMENDED. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION NOTIFICATION DATED 12.12.2018 OF THE ELECTION COMMISSION. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 20.12.2018 IN W.A.NO.2477/2018. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24.11.2018 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT BANK. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

¶41

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

¶42

//TRUE COPY//

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

PA TO JUDGE

Sunu George, v. the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunu George, v. the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (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

Chokkad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the Deputy Labour Commissioner

Anoop Jose Vs Muvattupuzha Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.556

Mon Joseph Vs Dr.Venu.v.Ias

Thajunesa Vs the Authorised Officer

LIC Housing Finance Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Shobhana.v.K@Shobha Vs Maintenance Tribunal and Sub Collector