Kerala High Court
The Karuvanthiruthy Service ... vs The Assistant Registrar Of ... on 2 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 31777 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
THE KARUVANTHIRUTHY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LTD.NO.D2638
AGED 1 YEARS
KARUVANTHIRUTHY, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE-673631,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETATY.
BY ADV SRI.P.P.JACOB
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
(G)
KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE ASSIATANT REGISTRAR(G),
PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673004
2 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G),
KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR(G),
PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673004
3 THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT,
KOZHIKODE-673001
4 THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT,
KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF CO-
OPERATIVE AUDIT, KOZHIKODE-673001
BY ADV.SRI.MATHEW.G.VADAKKEL, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.31777 of 2017
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 02nd day of July, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is working as Class I special grade co-
operative society. The Joint Registrar issued Exts.P1 to P3
orders permitting the society to start a hyper market. The
society is functioning in profit continuously for the last several
years. As per the circular issued by the Registrar of Co-
operative Societies, the amount spent from the general fund
has to be incorporated as assets except the portion of the
amount of depreciation. According to the petitioner, violating
the above norms, respondents 3 and 4 included the amount in
the category 'reserve' leaving the society as one functioning in
loss at a time when the society is functioning in huge profit.
According to the petitioner, the stand taken by respondents 3
and 4 is that the above categorization can be changed on
getting approval from the Joint Registrar for the amount spent
by the society. The petitioner submitted in the writ petition
that the amount was spent pursuant to Exts.P1 to P3 orders
and separate approval is not necessary. The petitioner
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
submitted that in spite of all these, the petitioner has
submitted Exts.P5 and P7 representation by adopting
necessary resolution requesting approval for the amount
spent. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.
(C).No.23314/2017 which was disposed directing the 2nd
respondent to entertain the representation and pass orders
taking note of Exts.P1 to P3 orders and permissions. Ext.P15 is
the consequential order passed.
2. This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P15 order
and with following other prayers:
i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ order
or direction calling for the records leading to
issue of Ext.P15 and quash the same.
ii. Declare that the profit accrued for the financial
year 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 need not be
set apart towards reserve leaving the petitioner
to loss and the maximum amount that can be
set apart towards reserve will only be 1/10 of
the amount spend from the general fund for the
Neethi hyper market as the amount to be
recouped within a period of ten years.
Iii. Declare that the starting and functioning of the
Neethi Hyper Market was on the basis of Ext.P1
to P3 orders and proceedings issued by the
second respondent consistent with the object of
the byelaw and that the amount spend is only
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
consequential and the denial of formal approval
as per Ext.P15 is without jurisdiction and
contrary to the scheme and object of the Kerala
Co-operative Societies Act and Rules.
iv. Issue a writ of mandamus or other writ order or
direction directing the 4th respondent to remove
the entry by including the profit as reserve
towards the amount spend for the hyper
market, from the category reserve and to show
profit in the respective entry in the audit
statement.
v. Issue such other reliefs which may be deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of
the above writ petition.
3. Today, when this writ petition came up for
consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that
Ext.P15 order is passed without hearing the petitioner and
without considering the contentions of the petitioner. The
counsel submitted that if an opportunity is given, the
petitioner will be able to submit his real grievance before the
2nd respondent and hence there may be a direction to the 2 nd
respondent to reconsider the matter. The Government Pleader,
after getting instructions, submitted that no hearing was given
to the petitioner before passing Ext.P15 order.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, without
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
going to the merit of the case, I think Ext.P15 can be set aside,
directing the 2nd respondent to reconsider the entire issue
after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. All
contentions of the petitioner in the writ petition can be left
open.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the following
manner:
1. Ext.P15 order is set aside.
2. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider
the entire issue after giving an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner and all other affected
parties in accordance to law and pass a fresh
order as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
3. The petitioner will produce a copy of this
judgment along with a copy of this writ
petition before the 2nd respondent.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31777/2017
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED TO
THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 11.3.2015.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED TO
THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 29.5.2015.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY
THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 28.9.2015.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RESOLUTION
NO.18(8) DATED 30.11.16 OF 0THE
COMMITTEE OF THE SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 30.9.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROPOSAL WITH
RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL BODY
OF THE PETITIONER DATED 17.12.2016.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.2017.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.8
ALONG WITH REPRESENTATION DATED
4.1.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT IN THE
AUDIT ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT
DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P10: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ONE SUCH
CIRCULAR 101/75 DATED 15.11.1975
ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES.
EXHIBIT P11: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO.23314/2017 DATED 14.7.2017.
EXHIBIT P12: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION
OF THE BYELAW PAGE 1 AND 3 OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P13: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY
THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND
RESPONDENT DATED 23.1.2016.
W.P.(C).No.31777/2017
EXHIBIT P14: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
15941/2014 DATED 1.12.2016.
EXHIBIT P15: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY
THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 19.9.2016.
