Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE1T DAY OF APRIL201411TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WP(C).No. 29583 of 2013 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ THE THUDAYANNOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.Q371 THUNDAYANNOOR PO, KOTTARAKKARA KOLLAM DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA SRI.NISHIL.P.S. SMT.O.V.BINDU RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) KOLLAM, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM -691 001.
2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KOTTARAKKARA - 691 506.
3. SRI. MANNUR BABU 'SABARMATHI', VELUMTHARA, CHARIPPARAMBU PO KADAKKAL691536, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MANOJ KUNJACHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0104-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29583 of 2013 (W) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C.R.P.(2)7421/2012 DATED0808-2012 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C.R.P.(2)7421/2012 DATED2308-2012 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C.R.P.(2)7266/2013 DATED2409-2013 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C.R.P.(2)7266/2013 DATED0810-2013 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED3110-2013 IN WPC.NO.19974/2012. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.CRP(2) 7266/2013 DATED2911-2013 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : EXT.R3A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE REPORT OF THE BANK TRUE COPY PS TO JUDGE K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
............................................................... WPC No.29583 of 2013 ............................................................... Dated this, the 1st day of April 2014 Judgment The petitioner, a Society, is aggrieved by Exts.P4 and P6 orders passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Ext.P4 is an enquiry initiated under Section 65 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act regarding the construction activities carried on by the Society. Ext.P6 is a stay of the proceedings, making appointment to the post of Attender and Peon, pending enquiry proceedings.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that the Joint Registrar has initiated the above proceedings at the instigation of the third respondent and it is not permissible, going by the decisions of this Court in Thiruvalla East Co-operative Bank v. Joint Registrar (2006(4) KLT959 and Panicker Kadavu Consumer Co-operative Society Limited v. Registrar of Co- operative Societies (1994(2) KLT564. WPC No.29583 of 2013 2 3. Looking at Ext.P6 order, this Court is not persuaded to find that the enquiry has been initiated without the Joint Registrar, the first respondent, having considered the complaint raised by the third respondent independently and without application of mind. The judgments aforecited only declare that Section 65 enquiry cannot be initiated at the instigation of another person. But, when a complaint is filed by a member and the Joint Registrar applies his mind to the facts of the complaint and initiates an enquiry, necessarily, it would come within the ambit of an enquiry by the Registrar on his own motion. Ext.P4 clearly indicates that the Joint Registrar has considered the issue and is personally satisfied that an enquiry is necessitated. However, it is to be noticed that Ext.P4 enquiry was directed to be completed within 30 days and Ext.P4 itself has been issued on 08.10.2013. Immediately thereafter, Ext.P6 was also issued, staying further appointments to the petitioner's Society.
4. In fact, the enquiry conducted into the alleged discrepancy in the construction carried on, has, absolutely, no connection with the appointments to be made to the petitioner's WPC No.29583 of 2013 3 Society. It is also pertinent to note that this Court has, by Ext.P5 Judgment, directed the Joint Registrar to consider whether the post of Salesman, to which the appointment was made, could be continued and also whether the additional posts sought for could be sanctioned. Evidently, nothing has transpired with respect to the directions issued in Ext.P5.
5. On the basis of an enquiry into certain allegations totally unconnected with the appointments, the appointments to the sanctioned posts in the Society cannot be interdicted by the Joint Registrar. Ext.P4, however, is to be enquired into and concluded, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to file objections to the enquiry report, if at all submitted by the officer appointed under Ext.P4. Needless to say, a copy of the report shall also be supplied to the petitioner herein. Ext.P6, however, has to be set aside. It is ordered accordingly. The petitioner Bank is entitled to proceed with the selection and appointment to the sanctioned posts, which are lying vacant in the Bank. WPC No.29583 of 2013 4 The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE sta WPC No.29583 of 2013 5