Court : Kerala
Ashok Bhushan, C.J. 1. These two Writ Appeals have been filed against the common judgment dated 17.08.2015 by which the Writ Petition filed by the 1st respondent herein has been allowed. W.A. No.2016 of 2015 has been filed by the 1st respondent to the Writ Petition No.24461 of 2014, i.e., Thrissur District Cooperative Bank Ltd and W.A. No.2014 of 2015 has been filed by the additional 5th respondent in the Writ Petition. Parties shall be referred to as described in the Writ Petition. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the Writ Petition are: The 1st respondent, Thrissur District Co-operative Bank (for short, the Bank ) is the Central Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short, the 1969 Act ). There are three sanctioned posts of Dy.General Manager in the Bank. One vacancy in the post of Dy.General Manager was notified by the Bank to the Kerala Public Service Commission (for short, the Commission ) vide letter dated 20.12.2003 for direct recruitment. After r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
1. The constitutional validity of Section 56A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, falls for consideration in these writ petitions. 2. In W.P.(C)No.18030/2014, the petitioners are the Co-operative Bank and one of its members; respondents 4 and 5 are the borrowers, the latter of whom mortgaged her property as security for the loans. Apart from being husband and wife, the fourth and fifth respondents are the petitioners in 18030/2014 respectively. 3. While the Bank has raised the issue of vires of Section 56A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, the borrowers, on the other hand, seek the enforcement of Exhibits P7 and P8 orders passed by the authorities drawing their power from the impugned provision. 4. Since the writ petitions have similar issues involving the same parties, this Court has proposed to dispose of the writ petitions through a common judgment. For ease of reference and convenience, the facts as pleaded and the parties as have been arrayed in W.P.(C)No. 1803...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
1. These Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are in challenge of orders passed by the learned Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram (for short, "the Special Judge") under Sec. 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code") directing the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau (for short, "the VandACB") to conduct a preliminary enquiry and register a case if materials indicating commission of offences as alleged in the private complaints are disclosed and if not, report the matter to the learned Special Judge. The following questions of law are urged for a decision: I. Whether, in view of Sec. 68A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act,1969 (for short, "the Act") it was within the power of learned Special Judge to direct the VandACB to conduct an enquiry/investigation and the VandACB to enquire/investigate into matters relating to a Co-operative Society registered under the Act? II. Whether, it was within the power of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2012(3)ILR(Ker)543; 2012(3)KLJ506; 2012(3)KLT637
K. Surendra Mohan, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P12 order of suspension passed against him by the 4th respondent. The petitioner is an employee of the 1st respondent. He is working at Kanhangad, Kasaragod district, as an Incharge of Copra Procurement. 2. Advocate P.M.Mohammed Shiraz, who appears for the 1st respondent, raises a preliminary question regarding the maintainability of the Writ Petition itself. According to the counsel, the dispute in this Writ Petition, being one between an employee and a Co-operative Society, can be determined only in accordance with the provisions of Section 69 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (`the Act' for short). The learned counsel also relies on the decision of this Court in Edava Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. Co-operative Arbitration Court [2008 (3) KLT 780]. 3. Advocate K.R.Ganesh, who appears for the petitioner, relies on another decision of this Court in Surabhi Employees Trade Union Congress v. K...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2006(1)KLT255
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. W.P(C).22100/05 is by two members of the Board of Directors of Kottukal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. T 196, hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank'. W.P(C).31344/ 05 is by the President of the said Bank.2. W.P(C).22100/05 is filed challenging the legality of a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Bank, stating that the petitioners in W.P(C).22100/05 are disqualified and have lost their membership in the Board of Directors of the Bank. The primary contention raised in support of the said Writ Petition is that under Rule 44(3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules', the Joint Registrar, exercising powers of the Registrar, has to take a decision on the question of disqualification and it is only following such a decision by the said statutory authority, would a member be treated as disqualified.3. Though the petitioner in W.P(C).31344/05 is not a respondent in W.P(C).22100/05, I have heard his learned...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 2006(4)KLT950
K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.1. The appellant Co-operative Society could not succeed in O.P. No. 21569/04, wherein it challenged Exts. P-3 and P-5 orders. Therefore, this Writ Appeal.2. The grievance of the appellant is that by Ext. P-3 order, the Joint Registrar had granted exemption from the requisite qualification to the 3rd respondent, long after his retirement and directed the appellant to pay the benefits arising out of retrospective promotion, for which he became eligible after giving exemption from qualification. Further contention is that Government also, in appeal against Ext. P-3, while passing Ext. P-5 did not advert to this aspect. It is, while rejecting the challenge against Exts. P-3 and P-5, the incompetency of the Joint Registrar to grant exemption to an employee in terms of Rule 185(8) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969.3. The facts, in short, for disposal of this appeal are as follows:4. The 3rd respondent was an Assistant Secretary in the service of the appell...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1999Ker158
ORDERC.S. Rajan, J.1. The petitioner was the Managing Trustee of the first respondent. He was removed from the office of the Managing Trustee as per Exhibit P-7. It is Exhibit P-7 that is under challenge in this is Original Petition.2. Sri Jacob Varghese, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has taken the preliminary objection that the first respondent is neither a State nor an instrumentality of the State as understood in Article 12 of the Constitution of India and therefore, is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.3. According to the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, the first respondent is a society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act. Therefore, according to the respondents, the character of the first respondent is only that of a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The learned counsel also relied on the following decisio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE14H DAY OF SEPTEMBER201523RD BHADRA, 1937 WA.NO. 2516 OF2009( ) ------------------------ AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED1308.2009 IN W.P(C) NO.30854 OF2007OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------ CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK BANK LTD.NO.1155, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. K.SANTHOSH RAILWAY STATION, CHIRAYINKEEZHU.2. LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. R2 BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS R. BY ADV. SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) R. BY ADV. SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL R. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEDEV R. BY ADV. SRI.RONY JOSE R. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. GIRIJA GOPAL THIS WR...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Facts: 1. Both the petitioners are the members of the sixth respondent Society; the second petitioner has also had the distinction of being the former President of the parent Society Tellichery Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. 2. Initially, Iritty Taluk was created by carving out some territories from two other taluks; namely, Kannur and Thalassery. The creation of the new taluk has, therefore, necessitated the division of the two Co-operative Societies situated in those Taluks: the Kannur and the Tellichery Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Banks. In that process, the Government has appointed a Special Officer to oversee the operations of bifurcation of the existing societies and registration of the new society. 3. In the course of time, the Special Officer passed a resolution proposing to hold the election to the new society on 27.02.2016. Accordingly, acting on the resolution thus passed, the Election Commission issued Exhibit P1 notification to hold the ele...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Ashok Bhushan, C.J. 1. This Appeal has been filed by a Co-operative Bank and its President who were respondent Nos.5 and 4 to the Writ Petition filed by three petitioners, members of the Managing Committee of the Bank, challenging the proceedings initiated by the Bank for their expulsion from primary membership of the Bank. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition directing that the petitioners shall continue to be the members of the Bank. 2. The parties shall be referred to as described in the Writ Petition. 3. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this Writ Appeal are: Writ Petitioners were elected as members of the Managing Committee of the Bank (Directors of Board of Management of the Bank) on 05.09.2012. Petitioners 1 to 3 and other members of the Managing Committee sent a complaint dated 15.07.2013 to the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Thrissur making allegations against the Secretary of the Bank. Again a complaint dated 07.09.2013 was submitted by the petit...
Tag this Judgment!