IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
ANJARAKANDY FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LIMITED, NO.1141, P.O.MAMBA, KANNUR-670611
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MANOJ KUMAR P
K.P.PRADEEP
HAREESH M.R.
SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN
T.T.BIJU
T.THASMI
M.J.ANOOPA
SANU S MALAKEEL
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY CO-
OPERATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2 THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JAWAHAR
SAHAKARANA BHAVAN, DPI JUNCTION, THYCAUD P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014
3 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION
BOARD, TC NO 27/156 & 157, CHINMAYA LANE NEAR
AYURVEDA COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
4 THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE OMBUDSMAN, KATHIMUKKU,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM 695 023, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
5 M. KRISHNAN, S/O KUNHAMBU THAMB,KUDUKKIMETTA,
P.O. EACHUR, KANNUR 670 591.
6 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), KANNUR TALUK,
NEAR GANDHI CIRCLE, SOUTH BAZAR, KANNUR 670 002.
M.SASINDRAN,
VIDHYA. A.C
WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022
2
A.C.VENUGOPAL
PARVATHY K.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner - which is a Society registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act - has approached this Court through this writ petition, after having obtained Ext.P8 judgment in an earlier round of litigation. It is conceded that Ext.P8 has been confirmed in appeal and that the third respondent - Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board (for short "Board") has, thereafter, adjudicated the claims of the fifth respondent, leading to Ext.P9 notice to be issued to them under the Revenue Recovery Act.
2. The petitioner asserts that Ext.P9 is illegal because the adjudication by the Board was not proper and that this is more so because this Court had, in Ext.P8 judgment, directed that such be done afresh, which has not been complied with by them. The petitioner, therefore, prays that Ext.P9 be set aside.
3. Even though I have heard Smt.Thasmi T. - learned counsel for the petitioner, on the afore lines, the fact remains that Ext.P8 judgment makes it luculent that the "Board" was entitled to conduct a proper enquiry and quantify the amounts WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022 4 due from the petitioner. The petitioner does not have a case that they were not heard or that the adjudication was wrong. In any event, even if they have any such, it is up to them to approach the "Board" or other competent Statutory Authorities against the quantification and it was not permissible for them to have approached this Court through this writ petition, particularly when Ext.P9 is only a consequential action resultant to Ext.P8 judgment.
4. Presumably being aware of the mind of this Court as afore, Smt.Thasni T. - learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that if this Court is not inclined to intervene with Ext.P9, then liberty may be reserved to her client to challenge the quantification made by the Board, either before them or before the competent statutory Authority.
5. It is doubtless that when actions are taken under the applicable statutory scheme, the petitioner, as also the fifth respondent, have every legally permitted liberty available to them and it does not require any orders to be issued by this Court specifically.
6. Suffice to say, since Ext.P9 is consequent to Ext.P8 judgment, I do not think that this Court will be justified in WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022 5 intervening with it in any manner whatsoever.
Resultantly, I close this writ petition, without considering any of the contentions of the petitioner on its merits; however, leaving them liberty to either approach the "Board" - if they have any objections regarding the qualification; or other statutory Authorities, as may be permitted under the applicable Scheme.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25012/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21-11-
2014 IN WPⒸ NO 3205 OF 2014 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ENTERED BY THE PETITIONER AND 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 11-04-2017.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION NO. DBR NO. 7 OF 4/17-18 DATED 29-05-2017 OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO. 229/18 DATED 06-05-2018 FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT P4 BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO PB/LO/6433/2018 DATED 20-03-2019 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 B TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 17-7-2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 C TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL STATEMENT DATED 16-5-2019 FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 07-
09-2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER BANK TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER COM NO 229/2018 DATED 26-11-2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT WP(C) NO. 25012 OF 2022 7 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29-06-
2022 IN WPC NO 16552 OF 2022 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO RRC NO.2022/1504/01 DATED 01-07-2022 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO RRC NO.2022/1504/01 DATED 03-07-2022 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT