Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2013 10TH SRAVANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 19188 of 2013 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- SUNIL M.P. S/O.PUSHPASARAN, PEADIYEKAL PARAMBIL , EDAKOCHI ERNAKULAM-682 010. BY ADVS.BY SENIOR ADV.SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI SRI.SAJU.S.A SRI.T.SIVADASAN SMT.P.A.SHEEJA SMT.MEENA.A. RESPONDENTS: ----------- 1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) SOUTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKLAM, KOCHI-16.
2. JNANODAYAM SABHA REGISTER NO.ER 159/78, EDAKOCHI KOCHI-682 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. THE SECRETARY, JNANODAYAM SABHA, REGISTER NO.ER 159/78, EDAKOCHI KOCHI-682 006 . BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.VINCENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-08-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK WP(C).No. 19188 of 2013 (W) ---------------------------- APPENDIX -------- PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1.TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL BYLAW OF THE SOCIETY DATED 21 5/1978. EXHIBIT P2.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRR DATED 8 8/2011. EXHIBIT P3.TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED 12 12/2011 IN WPC NO.31853/2011. EXHIBIT P4.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR DATED 4 2/2012. EXHIBIT P5.TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY DATED 3 11/2012. EXHIBIT P6.TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED 8 3/2013 IN WPC NO.7506/2012. EXHIBIT P7.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16 5/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3. EXHIBIT P8.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3 7/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3. EXHIBIT P9.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ANUAL GENERAL BODY OF THE SOCIETY DATED 13 11/2012. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: W.P.(C). No. 19188 of 2013 ...................................................... Dated this the 1st day of August, 2013 JUDGMENT
The petitioner is challenging Ext.P5 order of suspension issued by the 2nd respondent and seeks for a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to take a decision on Exts.P7 and P8 representations preferred by the petitioner, so as to reinstate the membership of the petitioner in the Society.
2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner being a member of the 2nd respondent Society challenged some amendments brought about; before the 1st respondent. This made the 2nd respondent to suspend the petitioner for having pursued an act against the Society. The amendment, as well as suspension, were the subject matters of challenge before this Court in W.P.(C).No. 31853 of 2011, which was disposed of as per Ext.P3 judgment dated 12.12.2011, directing the 1st respondent to consider the said aspects.
3. Ext.P4 is the order issued by the 1st respondent on 4.02.2012, whereby it was held that the amendment was not W.P.C. No. 19188 of 2013 -2- accepted by the District Registrar and further that, the 2nd respondent had informed that no suspension was there, virtually revealing that the grievance of the petitioner was no more. But it was thereafter, that the 2nd respondent suspended the petitioner as per Ext.P5 order dated 3.11.2012. The petitioner had approached this Court in the meanwhile, by way of W.P.(C). No.7506 of 2012, seeking to implement Ext.P4. At the same time, the 2nd respondent Society also approached this Court by filing another writ petition challenging the stand taken by the 1st respondent in not accepting the amendment. Some other party had also approached this Court by filing yet another writ petition and all these cases were considered together and Ext.P6 judgment came to be passed, whereby this Court held that, there was no question of any approval by the 1st respondent and that, the statutory requirement having been satisfied by the 2nd respondent, as specified therein, it should have been accepted by the 1st respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner's writ petition was dismissed and the other writ petitions were allowed.
4. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner approached the W.P.C. No. 19188 of 2013 -3- 2nd respondent by filing Ext. P7 and P8 to restore the membership in view of the turn of events and finalization of the matter by this Court as per Ext.P6. The prayer is to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts. P7 and P8 in the said circumstances.
5. After hearing, and also considering the pleadings and proceedings, this Court finds that, the 2nd and 3rd respondents do not come within the purview of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Ext.P5 order of suspension issued by the said Society is not liable to be intercepted by this Court invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The law has been laid down by a Division Bench of this Court as per decision reported in V. Bhaskaran & Others v. Additional Secretary and Others (1987 (2) KLT
903) holding that no writ will lie against a Society. It is also relevant to note that, this is not a case wherein, any 'public duty' is cast upon the respondents 2 and 3, so as to call for interference applying the law declared by the Apex Court in Sri. Anadi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktagee Vandasjiswami Suvarna Jayanti W.P.C. No. 19188 of 2013 -4- Mahothsav Smarak Trust and Others v. V.R. Rudani and Others AIR 198.(SC) 1607. In the said circumstance, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner to move other appropriate forum, by way of appropriate proceedings; in accordance with law. All issues are left open. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/-