Kerala High Court
Walayar Milk Producers Co-Op ... vs Selvaraj A on 9 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WA NO. 1849 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 21721/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANTS:
1 WALAYAR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.
NO. P. 100 D, APCOS, CHANDRAPURAM, WALAYAR DAM P.O.,
PALAKKAD - 678 624, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE,
WALAYAR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OP SOCEITY LTD, NO. P. 100 D,
APCOS, CHANDRAPURAM, WALAYAR DAM P.O., PALAKKAD - 678
624, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT.
BY ADVS.
N.RAGHURAJ
VIVEK MENON
SAYUJYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 SELVARAJ A., AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. ASHIRVADAM, SILVASREE HOUSE, CHANDRAPURAM,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
2 SAKTHIVEL R., S/O. RAMASWAMY KOUNDER, DAM ROAD,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
3 SIVALINGAM N., S/O. NACHIMUTHU KOUNDER, DAM ROAD,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
4 SUBRAMANINAN V.,
S/O. VELUSWAMY KOUNDER, DAM ROAD, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD -
678 624.
5 MANIKANDAN, S/O. ARUCHAMY, PAMPUMPARA KALAM, WALAYAR,
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
2
PALAKKAD - 678 624
6 K. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O. KALIYAPPA KOUNDER, DAM ROAD,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
7 MARTIN JOSE, S/O. PHILIP, CHANDRAPURAM, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD -
678 624.
8 BALASUBRAMANIAN,
S/O. PODARASWAMY KOUNDER, KULIYANKAD, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD -
678 624.
9 KURISU XAVIER,
S/O. AROGYA MARIYADAS, KOVILPALAATHAR (H), PAMPUMPARA,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD -678 624.
10 ANTONY PHILOMIN RAJ, S/O. AROGYASWAMY CHANDRAPURAM,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
11 DHARMALINGAM, S/O. PAZHANI MUTHU KOUNDER, KULIYANKAD,
WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
12 CHARLES, S/O. MAHIMAIRAJ, ATTIPATHY, WALAYAR DAM POST,
PALAKKAD - 678 624.
13 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
14 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DAIRY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, CIVIL
STATION, PALAKKAD - 678 501.
15 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
WALAYAR POLICE STATION, WALAYAR, PALAKKAD - 678 624.
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI T K VIPINDAS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.12.2022, ALONG
WITH WA.1851/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WA NO. 1851 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 16452/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:
WALAYAR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD..,
NO.P.100 D,APCOS,CHANDRAPURAM,WALAYAR DAM P.O.,PALLAD-678
624,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY ADVS.
N.RAGHURAJ
SAYUJYA
VIVEK MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT
OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT,GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DAIRY DEVELOP,ENT DEPARTMENT,CIVIL
STATION PALAKKAD-678 501.
3 ARUMUGHAN N., S/O.NATARAJ KOUNDER,PAMPUMPARA,WALAYAR,
PALAKKAD-678 624.
4 INDU RANI,AGED 52 YEARS,W/O.LATE RAMESH,WALAYAR DAM
P.O.,PALAKKAD-678 624.
BY ADV K.T.THOMAS
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI T K VIPINDAS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.12.2022,
ALONG WITH WA.1849/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
4
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & C.JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
-------------------------------------
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 09th December, 2022
JUDGMENT
K.Vinod Chandran, J.
The writ appeals arise from a common judgment in two
writ petitions; one filed by a Milk Producer's Society and the other it's
members. A dispute arose in the Society between the President and
some of its members. An Administrative Committee had to be appointed
for reason of six members of the Managing Committee resigning, in view
of the allegations against the President. On fresh elections held, the very
same person came back into the office of the President and one of the
members challenged the election before the Co-operative Arbitration
Court. On being elected back, the President allegedly started harassing
the members who were working against him and refused to accept the
milk supplied by them. An altercation ensued and there was allegation
raised of obstruction of the functioning of the Society and assault of its
employees. The Society issued notices under Rule 16(3) of the Kerala
Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, threatening removal from the
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
membership of the Society, which threat was also carried out. A
complaint was filed by the expelled members before the Deputy
Director and pursuant to the direction in a writ petition, the Deputy
Director considered the matter and rescinded the decision of the
Managing Committee of the Society expelling the members from its
membership. Despite the expulsion having been set aside the Society
refused to accept milk from the said members. There were also some
observations against the members who faced expulsion, in the order
passed by the Deputy Director, which rescinded the expulsion; for the
provision under which the action initiated did not confer such powers
with the Managing Committee. Both these aspects were questioned in
one of the writ petitions, from which one of the instant appeals arise.
Two of those, who faced expulsion approached this Court earlier with a
writ petition, in which an interim order was granted permitting supply
of milk to the Society; which interim order was granted to the present
writ petitioners also.
2. The Society filed an appeal from the decision of the Deputy
Director and also filed a writ petition seeking expeditious disposal.
Both the above writ petitions were heard together and disposed of by a
learned Single Judge, directing the appeals and stay petition preferred
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
by the Society and the appeals contemplated by the members to be
disposed of together. The Government considered the appeals filed by
the members and the Society and rejected both the appeals. The order
of the Deputy Director rescinding the decision of the Society was
upheld, finding that R.16(3) does not empower the Society to expel the
members on the grounds alleged. The Deputy Director found that
despite proof of the members having acted against the interest of the
Society, the committee did not have the authority to expel the members
invoking R.16(3); both of which findings were affirmed by the
Government by Ext.P10.
3. The challenge of the Society to Ext.P10 order is on the
ground of violation of principles of natural justice, which was found to
be fallacious by the learned Single Judge especially considering the fact
that there was an argument note submitted before the 3 rd respondent,
also raising grounds in the appeal filed by the Society. Before us also the
learned Counsel would allege that the Society was not put to notice of
the hearing of the appeal filed by the Society, evidenced from Ext.P8
notice. It is the argument that in Ext.P8 notice, the reference was only to
the appeals filed by the members and this was in violation of the
directions in the judgment, which required the appeal filed by the
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
members and the Society to be disposed of together.
4. We are unable to accept the argument raised by the
appellant's Counsel. Ext.P8 also referred to the judgment in WP(C) No.
9740/2020 and WP(C) No.10096/2020, in which the direction to
dispose off both the appeals together was issued. The direction therein
was to consider both the appeals of the members and the Society
together. It is very clear that at the time of disposal of the writ petition
there were no appeals filed by the members. It was only on the
submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the members
that they too would prefer appeals from the order of the Deputy
Director, that the learned Single Judge directed the appeal filed by the
Society along with any appeal preferred by the members to be disposed
of together. This is the reason why the appeals filed by the members,
subsequently, were specifically referred as item No.1 in Ext.P8 notice,
produced in W.P (C) No. 16452 of 2021 and as item No.2, Ext.P7
judgment was also specifically referred to. It is fallacious for the
appellant to now contend that there was no notice of the Society's
appeal, Again as noticed by the learned Single Judge, the proceedings
would indicate that the appeals were heard together and disposed of by
a common order, Ext.P10 and the society also put forth their arguments
Writ Appeal Nos. 1849 of 2022 &
1851 of 2022
in the hearing conducted. Learned Single Judge according to us, rightly
referred to Ashok Kumar Sonkar v. Union of India (2007) 4 SCC 54 to
hold that an interference to the impugned order on the ground raised of
violation of principles of natural justice; which in any case does not
exist, would in any event, will also be a futile exercise; since the action
against the members under R.16(3) cannot at all be justified.
We find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment
and dismiss the appeals in limine.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE
jma
