Pindimana Service Co-Operative vs Registrar Of Co-Operative … on 22 February, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 6246 of 2008(R)


1. PINDIMANA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
                       ...       Respondent

2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

4. KOTTAPPADY EAST CO-OPERATIVE BANK,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

 Dated :22/02/2008

 O R D E R
                THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
                         -------------------------------
                       W.P(C) No. 6246 OF 2008
                       -----------------------------------
             Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

In the light of the directions being issued herein, notice to the

4th respondent is dispensed with preserving his right to seek

review of this judgment, if aggrieved.

2. The petitioner complains about the 4th respondent

allegedly over-stepping into the area of operation of the petitioner,

to have a branch. The 4th respondent is shown to be represented

only by an administrative committee and could not therefore take

any policy decision beyond that is permissible within the

framework of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules as

interpreted and laid down by this Court. But, the petitioner’s

complaint regarding any such action can be attended to by

respondents 1 and 2, who have the authority to ensure that the

complaint of the petitioner is properly attended to.

Under such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of

directing that Exts.P2 and P3 would be taken up by the 2nd

respondent and the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of

being heard before any decision is taken to grant any permit to the

WPC No. 6246 OF 2008
2

4th respondent to operate any branch within the area of operation

of the petitioner. Until such hearing and decision, the status quo

as on today shall be maintained.

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE

ttb

WPC No. 6246 OF 2008
3