Kerala High Court
K.Reghunath vs Joint Registrar Of Co-Operative ... on 3 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WA NO. 1598 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.10.2022 IN WP(C)
NO.32016/2022 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
K.REGHUNATH, AGED 46 YEARS,
RAVI NIVAS, SOUTH STREET,
NALLEPPILLY P.O, PALAKKAD - 678553.
BY ADVS.
P.N.MOHANAN
C.P.SABARI
AMRUTHA SURESH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G)
OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES, NEW CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD - 678001.
2 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES, ELECTORAL OFFICER TO NALLEPPILLY
SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.R.43, CHITTOOR,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678553.
3 NALLEPPILLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LTD.NO.R.43, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
NALLEPPILLY P.O, CHITTOOR, PALAKKAD, PIN -678553.
4 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF NALLEPPILLY SERVICE CO-
OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.R.43, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRESIDENT, NALLEPPILLY P.O, CHITTOOR, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 673553.
W.A.No.1598 of 2022 2
5 THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION,
REPRESENTED BY ELECTION COMMISSIONER
3RD FLOOR, CO-BANK TOWERS, PALAYAM, VIKAS BHAVAN
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033.
BY ADVS.
T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
C.M.NAZAR
BY SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1598 of 2022 3
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & C.JAYACHANDRAN, JJ
----------------------------------------------
W.A.No.1598 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 03rd November, 2022
JUDGMENT
K. Vinod Chandran,J
By the impugned judgment, the prayer of
the petitioner, to include the members in Exts.P2
to P4 lists in the preliminary and final voters
list, brought out pursuant to Ext.P12 election
notification, was declined. The petitioner
contended that the share value of the membership of
the society was enhanced from Rs.10 to Rs.50 on
29.09.2014, which was not informed to the members.
The petitioner and other similarly placed members
were hence unable to remit the enhanced value and
thus are disabled from participating in the
election scheduled on 27.11.2022.
2. In two other writ petitions filed by
similarly placed members, the learned Single Judge
had issued an interim direction facilitating
additional share value to be accepted from
individual members appearing at the office of the
society, in person, with an application for
accepting the same. The interim order, by way of
abundant caution, also directed the Joint Registrar
to depute an officer at or above the level of Unit
Inspector to oversee the procedure of acceptance of
additional amounts. The learned Single Judge held
that the petitioner is attempting to espouse the
cause of a large number of members, who were not
before Court. The election proceedings also had
commenced. The remedy available was stated to be
under S.69(2)(c) of the Kerala Co-operative
Societies Act.
3. Admittedly, the enhancement of share
value is made in the year 2014 and there was an
earlier election in the year 2017; which the
appellant alleges was uncontested and hence the
question of disability to participate in the
election never arose. Even after 8 years, when the
next election was scheduled, certain members
approached this Court and by interim order they
were facilitated to make payment of the additional
share value. In fact, all such similarly situated
members were also allowed to make the payment of
additional share value. It is also evident that
many a member approached the Bank and paid up the
additional amounts. Very strangely a contention is
taken in the writ petition that the notices issued
to the members, who had not paid the additional
share value as seen from Ext.P11, is sheer contempt
(sic) of the interim order passed by this Court and
that the statute does not provide for such
individual notices. We cannot but observe that in
fact, it is in furtherance of the interim order
that such notices have been issued by the Society,
which also proves their bonafides. It is very
pertinent that the petitioner does not deny that a
similar notice was not sent to him.
4. In this context, it is also to be noticed
that there is no specific averment that the
petitioner, on his own or the other members in
Exts.P2 to P4 lists, approached the Bank in
obedience to the interim order passed. We perfectly
agree with the learned Single Judge that the
petitioner cannot espouse the cause of other
members and his remedy at this stage lies under
S.69(2)(c).
5. When we were dismissing the writ
petition, learned Counsel Sri.P.N.Mohanan requested
that at least the petitioner's additional share
value may be accepted and himself participated in
the election process. The learned Senior Government
Pleader Sri.T.K.Vipindas submits that already the
final voters list has been published. Moreover, we
notice that the learned Single Judge has
specifically observed that the petitioner could
only agitate his individual grievance and obviously
no such prayer to accept at least his additional
share value was made before the learned Single
Judge. The appellant, figuratively, has missed the
bus and there is no reason to permit him to pay the
additional share value at this stage, especially
when the appellant admits that he was aware of the
interim orders passed and does not speak in the
writ petition about any attempt made to comply with
the same.
We find no reason to entertain the appeal
and the same stands dismissed in limine.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE
sp/03/11/2022
