High Court Kerala High Court

G.Pradeepkumar vs The Kollengode Co-Operative … on 30 May, 2008

Kerala High Court
G.Pradeepkumar vs The Kollengode Co-Operative … on 30 May, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 16107 of 2008(P)


1. G.PRADEEPKUMAR, S/O.GOPALAN, PANAKAVU
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KOLLENGODE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

3. THE RETURNING OFFICER/OFFICE INSPECTOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

 Dated :30/05/2008

 O R D E R
         THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

             WP(C).No.16107 of 2008-P

  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

        Dated this the 30th day of May, 2008.

                     JUDGMENT

1.Petitioner’s nomination for an election to a co-

operative society has been rejected. The ground

of rejection is that though the petitioner holds

the required number of shares, he had not paid up

the balance of the share value in terms of the

amendment by which the value of each share was

enhanced to Rs.100/-. That amendment was some

time in 2006.

2.The petitioner faced with the rejection of his

nomination, takes the stand that the amendment of

the bye-laws in 2006 enhancing the share value

was without following the due procedure

prescribed by the Kerala Co-operative Societies

Act and Rules in as much as no notice, as

WP(C)16107/2008 -: 2 :-

contemplated by Section 11(2) of the Act, was

issued before such amendment.

3.The electoral process having commenced in 2008,

it is neither advisable nor reasonable to

interdict the electoral process on a ground

referable to a plea of illegal, irregular and

improper amendment of bye-laws which was made in

2006.

Therefore, while not stamping the amendment with

the approval of this Court, this writ petition is

dismissed without interfering with the refusal to

accept the nomination of the petitioner. This

judgment also shall not prejudice the right of

the petitioner to challenge the rejection of

nomination or for such other reliefs in relation

to election in accordance with the provisions of

the Act and Rules.

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.

Sha/030608