Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4952 Ker
Judgement Date : 4 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
WA NO. 552 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) 12848/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DECENT JUNCTION SERVICE
CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.Q.133
DECENT JUNCTION P.O., KOLLAM-691577, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT.
2 DECENT JUNCTION SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. Q.133
DECENT JUNCTION.P.O, KOLLAM-691577, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT.
BY ADVS.
SARANGADHARAN P.
N.S.SHAMILA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL)
CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN-691013.
2 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES(GENERAL)
CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN-691013.
3 THE INQUIRY OFFICER/UNIT INSPECTOR, VADAKKEVILA
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES(GENERAL), CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN-691013.
ADV JUSTIN JACOB SR GP
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.05.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 552 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran,J.
The appellants impugn the interim order of
the learned Single Judge dated 26.04.2022,
whereby, the enquiry being proceeded against
them under the provisions of Section 65 of the
Kerala Co-operative Societies Act has been
permitted to be continued, provided the time
frame specified in Ext.P3 is extended.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the
appellants submits that, as is evident from
Annexure B, the Joint Registrar of the Co-
operative Societies, Kollam, has extended the
time frame retrospectively from 06.04.2022 and
that this is in error.
3. Even if we are to find any force in the
afore submissions, it is evident that its merit
cannot be assessed in this writ appeal. It is
certainly upto the appellants to challenge WA NO. 552 OF 2022
Annexure B appropriately, particularly since,
through impugned order, the learned Judge has
only permitted the continuation of enquiry
subject to the time frame being extended
statutorily.
4. To paraphrase, if the appellants have a
case that the extension granted through
Annexure B is erroneous or incompetent, then it
is for them to challenge it appositely, either
in the pending writ petition or through a fresh
proceedings.
5. This is also because, even at the time
when the impugned order was issued, Annexure B
had been brought into force by the Joint
Registrar.
6. At this time, the learned counsel for
the appellants intervened to say that the
impugned order is also bad for the reason that
it partakes the characteristics of a final
judgment. We do not propose to speak on this at WA NO. 552 OF 2022
all because all which has been done by the
learned Judge is to allow the enquiry to
continue as per law, provided the time frame
has been extended. Since Annexure B order had
been, admittedly, issued by the Joint Registrar
even at the time when the impugned order was
issued, we do not deem it necessary to answer
this question in this appeal and leave it to be
pursued by the appellants before the learned
Single Judge.
Resultantly, this writ appeal is closed
with the afore observations and clarifications.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE SAS WA NO. 552 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF W.A.No.552 of 2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE OF THE APPELLANTS TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19-4-2022
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CRP 854/2016 DATED ANNEXURE B 18-4-2022 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!