Kuruvilassery Service ... vs Registrar Of Co-Operative ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2901 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO. 960 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

          KURUVILASSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.4185,
          VALIYAPARAMB, KURUVILASSERY P.O., THRISSUR-680732,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
          BY ADVS.
          A.JAYASANKAR
          MANU GOVIND


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
          DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, JAWAHAR SAHAKARANA BHAVAN,
          DPI JUNCTION, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
    2     JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL)
          AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003.
    3     ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
          (GENERAL),
          CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR-680307.
    4     SENIOR INSPECTOR/SALE OFFICER,
          OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
          SOCIETIES, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR-680307.
    5     V.A.VARGHESE,
          SENIOR INSPECTOR, MALA UNIT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT
          REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, CHALAKKUDY,
          THRISSUR-680307.

          SMT. RESMI.K.M ,SR.G.P


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 960 OF 2022                  2




                                JUDGMENT

The allegation in this Writ Petition is pointed

against the 5th respondent, who was holding the charge

of the 4th respondent office. According to the

petitioner, since there was inaction on the part of

the 5th respondent as the Sale Officer to expedite

proceedings for recovery of debts due to the

petitioner Bank, a complaint was filed to respondents

2 and 3. As a retaliation to that, an enquiry under

Section 65 of the Co-operative Societies Act has been

initiated and the very same Sale Officer-5th

respondent has been appointed as the enquiry officer,

contends the petitioner.

2. It is reported that the 5th respondent was

transferred to another Taluk, that he is not holding

the office of the 4th respondent as of now. It is also

stated that another officer will be appointed as the

inquiry officer.

3. In the light of the above, no further

directions are called for in the Writ Petition.

The Writ Petition is accordingly, closed.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE sd

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 960/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.4.2021 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BANK TO THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24.12.2021 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER.