Disposed

The Mukkom Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. F 1241 v. the District Collector, Kozhikode/ District Magistrate, Kozhikode

Kerala HC15 Oct 2020WP(C)/21610/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two writ petitions challenging a hearing notice issued by the Joint Registrar to prevent a superspreader event during the pandemic. It found safety measures adequate and directed that unnotified interrogators be served separate notices for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

No specific relief granted; petitions disposed of and separate notices directed for unnotified aggrieved members.

The Mukkom Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. F 1241 Vs… — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 23RD ASWINA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.21610 OF 2020(A)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THE MUKKOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. F 1241 MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶8

BY ADVS.

¶9

SRI.P.P.JACOB

¶10

SMT.MARIYAM JACOB

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶13

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KASBA POLICE STATION, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673004.

¶14

3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G), KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673004.

¶15

SRI BIML K NATH SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 2

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶21

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 23RD ASWINA, 1942

¶22

WP(C).No.21761 OF 2020(U)

¶23

PETITIONERS:

¶24

1 BABU KANJIRAPPARA, KACHERI MUKKOM P.O., KOZHIKODE

¶25

2 P.M.NARAYANAN PUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE, MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE

¶26

3 HARIDASAN.T., THEVALANMAL,P.O.KALLURUTTY (VIA), OMASSERY, KOZHIKODE

¶27

4 T.T.KANNANKUTTY, THACHOTTIL THADATHIL P.O., MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE

¶28

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU

¶29

RESPONDENTS:

¶30

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOZHIKODE/DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHKODE-673 020

¶31

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASBA POLICE STATION, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673 004

¶32

3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673 004

¶33

4 THE REGISTAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIEIS OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶34

5 THE MUKKOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.F 1241 MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE- 673 602, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶35

SRI K.P HARISH SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶36

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶37

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 3

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

W.P.(C).No.21610 of 2020 is instituted by the Mukkom Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. challenging Ext.P1 notice issued by the 3rd respondent to the Secretary of the said society calling upon him to give notice of hearing scheduled to be held on 16.10.2020 on the premise that the convening of the said meeting would be a superspreader event and would only augur to spread the Covid 19 pandemic.

¶40

W.P.C.No.21761 of 2020 is instituted by certain members of the Mukkom Service Co-operative Bank challenging the very same notice. According to the petitioners, Ext.P6 notice has not been served to the petitioners and they contend that the conduct of the 3rd respondent in conducting the hearing with selected persons by avoiding the petitioners is illegal and arbitrary.

¶41

The petitioners in both the writ petitions contend that by the impugned notice the 3rd respondent has invited more than 60 persons and if they assemble together on 16.10.2020 it would cause grave inconvenience particularly in view of the interdictory orders passed by the District Magistrate prohibiting the assembly of more than 5 persons to prevent the spread of the pandemic. The petitioners contend that detailing all these aspects the petitioners, as well as the Board of Directors, have submitted separate representations and the 3rd respondent is proceeding with the hearing without considering and disposing of the same.

¶42

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 4

¶43

The learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that an enquiry under Section 66(2) of the Act is pending finalisation and for that purpose, it was felt that a detailed hearing of the person who had raised the grievance was essential. It was in the said circumstances that notice was issued to the Secretary calling upon him and the Board of Directors to appear before the 3rd respondent. Some of the complainants have already filed statements and certain others have given authorisation to individuals to appear for and on their behalf at the time of hearing. Time slots have been given by separating the persons into groups of five. Each of the five groups have been allotted 45 minutes to present their version and by communication dated 14.10.2020 vide No.CRP(1)2838/20, this fact has been informed to the Secretary. It is further contended that insofar as the grievance of the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.21761 is concerned, they will be issued with separate notices at a future date and their version also will be heard before the proceedings are finalised.

¶44

I have considered the submissions and I have gone through the records made available. It appears that all safety measures have been taken by the 3rd respondent and he has taken care to split the persons called for hearing into separate groups of five. Time slots have been given from 10 am till 2.45 pm. I am satisfied that the measures taken by the 3rd respondent are proper and I do not think it necessary to adjourn the hearing to a future date. Insofar as the grievance of the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.21761 is concerned, Ext.P6 notice does

¶45

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 5

¶46

not concern them and they will be served with separate notices at a later stage

¶47

and they also shall be heard before the proceedings are finalised.

¶48

With these observations, these writ petitions are disposed of.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶51

JUDGE

¶52

DSV

¶53

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 6

¶54

APPENDIX OF W.P.(C).NO.21610 OF 2020

¶55

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶56

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOOPY OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 30.09.2020.

¶57

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 2.10.2020.

¶58

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF THE PETITIONER SOCIETY BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 6.10.2020.

¶59

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 7.10.2020.

¶60

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 10.10.2020.

¶61

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶62

W.P.(C).Nos.21610 & 21761 OF 2020 7

¶63

APPENDIX OF W.P.(C).NO.21761 OF 2020

¶64

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶65

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE PHOTOCOPY	OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE
	REPRESENTATION	DATED 10.7.2020 PAGES 1 TO 5 AND
	LAST TWO PAGES

¶66

EXHIBIT P2	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 7.7.2020 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER DATED 8.7.2020 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE THIRD PETITIONER DATED 7.7.2020 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE FOURTH PETITIONER DATED 3.7.2020 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 30.9.2020
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 9.10.2020
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 10.10.2020

¶67

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

The Mukkom Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. F 1241 v. the District Collector, Kozhikode/ District Magistrate, Kozhikode

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Mukkom Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. F 1241 v. the District Collector, Kozhikode/ District Magistrate, Kozhikode

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Eshaque, Vs the District Collector

Sumesh Vs the Superintendent of Polce

Abdul Azees Vs the Inspector of Police

Jessy Roy, Vs the District Collector

T. T. Abdul Gafoor Vs M. Kuttimammad

Indus Towers Limited Vs the Station House Officer