Prakash Thomas vs The Diocesan Episcope Of Marthoma ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2426 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
    FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1944
                      OP(C) NO. 469 OF 2023
                OS 17/2023 OF MUNSIFF COURT, RANNI
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:

          PRAKASH THOMAS
          AGED 47 YEARS
          S/O. LATE A V THOMAS, ELIMULLUMAMKAL HOUSE,
          CHELLACKADU P.O., PAZHAVANGADI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK,
          RANNI-PAZHAVANGADI PANCHAYATH, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA,
          PIN - 689677

          BY ADVS.
          MOLTY MAJEED
          C.A.MAJEED
          K.H.ASIF
          P.B.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR
          RUBEN GEORGE ROCK



RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

    1     THE DIOCESAN EPISCOPE OF MARTHOMA CHURCH
          RANNI NILACKAL DIOCESE
          RANNI, MANDIRAM P.O., RANNI, THE PATRON OF RANNI
          MARTHOMA MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE, ANGADI, RANNI,
          PATHANAMTHITTA-689673,

    2     RANNI MARTHOMA MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE
          REGISTERED OFFICE AT RANNI MARTHOMA MEDICAL HOSPITAL,
          ANGADI, RANNI,PATHANAMTHITTA -689673 REPRESENTED BY ITS
          PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY.

    3     THE PRESIDENT
          RANNI MARTHOMA MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE, ANGADI, RANNI,
          PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689673

    4     THE SECRETARY
          RANNI MARTHOMA MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE, ANGADI, RANNI,
          PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689673

    5     MANJISH MATHEW
          ADVOCATE, RANNI, RETURNING OFFICER, RANNI MARTHOMA
          MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE, ANGADI, RANNI,
 OP(C) NO. 469 OF 2023                  2

             PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689673

    6        C A ABIN OOMMEN ABRAHAM
             KUNNUMPURATHU PUTHENCAVIL, ASSISTANT RETURNING
             OFFICER, RANNI MARTHOMA MEDICAL MISSION CENTRE,
             ANGADI, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689673

             SRI. JOSEPH P ALEX
             SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE




     THIS     OP   (CIVIL)    HAVING   COME   UP    FOR    ADMISSION   ON
24.02.2023,     THE   COURT    ON   THE    SAME    DAY    DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
 OP(C) NO. 469 OF 2023            3




           Dated this the 24th day of February, 2023

                           JUDGMENT

The original petition is filed, inter alia, to direct the

first respondent to supervise the conduct of election of

the second respondent Centre scheduled to be held on

25.02.2023 and ensure that the election is conducted in a

fair and transparent manner. The petitioner is the

plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants in O.S.

No.17/2023 of the Court of the Munsiff, Ranni.

2. The relevant background facts leading to the

original petition, are: the petitioner has instituted O.S.

No.17/2023 before the court below, inter alia, to declare

that the appointment of the 5th respondent as the

Returning officer for the election to the Governing Body

of the second respondent Centre is illegal and liable to be

set aside. Even though the petitioner filed I.A. No.1/2023

(Ext.P3) in the suit, praying for an order of temporary

injunction, the same has not been considered by the court

below. Instead, the respondents are proceeding with the

election. The office of the Munsiff, Ranni, is lying vacant.

Therefore, the petitioner is left remediless to interdict the

election. Hence, the original petition.

3. Heard; Sri.Molty Majeed, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Joseph P Alex, the

learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and

Sri. George Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for

the respondents 5 and 6.

4. The question is whether this Court is to interfere

in the election process invoking its power of

superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India.

5. The petitioner has instituted Ext.P7 plaint on

04.02.2023, to declare the appointment of the 5 th

respondent as the Returning Officer to the election of the

second respondent Centre as illegal.

6. Along with the suit, the petitioner had filed Ext.P3

application, seeking an order of temporary injunction.

The application was resisted by the respondents through

Exts.P5 and P6 objections. Admittedly, no orders have

been passed on the application.

7. Now, the petitioner has rushed to this Court,

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct

the first respondent to supervise the conduct of the

election and for other ancillary reliefs.

8. Sri. Joseph P. Alex drew the attention of this

Court to the Memorandum of Association & Rules and

Regulations of the second respondent Centre. Rule 22 of

the said Rules provides the manner in which the General

Body Meeting has to be conducted. It is apposite to

extract the said Rules, which reads thus:-

"22. Mode of conduct of General Body Meeting General Body Meeting shall commence with worship and devotional talk followed by the presidential address Questions put up by members as per bye-laws shall be answered by the board. It should not take more than one hour. It shall be followed by business. The agenda shall be prepared by the governing Board. Minutes shall be read and approved at the close of the meeting. It shall disperse after prayers.

Election Procedure

a) Election of B,C,Dclass denomination representatives

1. Preparation of List of Primary Members The names of institutional representatives must be submitted to secretary on or before 30th November. The Governing Board shall prepare a complete list of all primary members categorically 45 days prior to the annual General Body meeting. The Board shall appoint a Returning officer and Assistant Returning Officer and a jury of Appeal consisting of 3 person 45 days prior to the Annual General Body meeting. The Board shall submit the list of primary members to the Returning Officer immediately after their appointment."

9. A bare reading of the above Rules reveals that if

any person has grievance regarding the appointment of a

Returning Officer, his remedy is to appeal to the jury of

Appeal, whose decision shall be final.

10. It is not discernible from the original petition, as

to whether the petitioner has invoked the remedy

provided under the said Rules.

11. The present plea of the petitioner is to direct the

first respondent-the patron of the second respondent

Centre - to monitor the election.

12. The powers of the patron is also clearly

delineated in Clause 26 of the Rules, which reads thus:-

"26. Patron The patron of the Mission shall be the diocesan Eppiscopa of the Marthoma Church who has jurisdiction over Ranni Marthoma Medical Mission Centre registered office. Patron may preside at the General Body meetings and meetings of Governing Board if present and desiring. Lands, sites, building or premises acquired by the Association shall be registered in the name of the Patron for and on behalf of the Association.

Where as the terms of the office of the Governing Board has expired and a new Governing Board has not been constituted or where the existing Governing Board resigns or where vacancies occurred in the Governing Board whether by resignation or otherwise and the number of remaining members cannot constitute the quorum for the meeting of the governing Board or when the Governing Board fails to hold its regular meetings consecutively for 6 months, the Patron shall either suo- moto or on a resolution passed in a special General Body of the Association, where 60% of the members of the Association have attended, take charge of the administration of the Association and shall exercise all the powers vested with the President, Vice- President, Secretary, Treasurer and the Governing Board. The Patron shall appoint an Administrator or Administrators to manage the affairs of the Association for a period not exceeding 6 months and they shall exercise such powers which are delegated to them by the patron. The Patron shall constitute the new Governing Board through election and hand over the administration of the association to the newly elected Governing Board within a period of six months."

13. A reading of Rule 26 substantiates that the

patron is conferred with the power to manage the affairs

of the Centre by nominating an Administrator, provided

there is no Governing Board. Therefore, the first

respondent is not conferred with any power to supervise

the conduct of the election of the second respondent

Centre, as prayed for. Even otherwise, if the petitioner

had such a request, he should have moved the court

below with such a plea and not in an original petition of

the present nature.

In view of the explicit Rules that are in vogue for

the conduct and management of the Centre, I am of the

firm view that it is not for this Court to sit in an appeal

over the conduct of the election of the Centre, in exercise

of the supervisory powers of this Court under Article 227

of the Constitution of India, and pass directions. It is to

be remembered that the election notification was

published on 11.01.2023. It is on the previous day of the

election that the present attempt is being made to stall

the election. I do not find any merits or bonafide in the

attempt warranting interference by this Court. The

original petition fails and is resultantly dismissed.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE

rmm24/02/2023

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 469/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit.P-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 18/01/2023 FILED BY MR SHIBU JOHN AND MR ANIL ABRAHAM TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit.P-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER DATED 12/01/2023 SUBMITTED TO THE1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit.P-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE IA 1/2023 IN OS 17/2023 BEFORE THE LEARNED MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI

Exhibit.P-4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE LEARNED MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNI AS OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF DISTRICT COURTS

Exhibit.P-5 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE IA

Exhibit.P-6 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 2ND TO 4TH RESPONDENTS IN THE IA

Exhibit.P-7 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS17/2023 FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED MUNSIFF COURT, RANNI