IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 30528 of 2005(H)
1. ANAD FARMER'S SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,
3. G. JAYAKUMAR @ ANAD JAYAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR(SC T.D.CO-OPB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :13/03/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)Nos.30528 & 35087 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated: 13th March, 2007
JUDGMENT
W.P.C.No.30528 of 2005 has been filed by the Anad Farmer’s
Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. arraying the Joint Registrar of Co-
operative Societies(General), Trivandrum, the District Co-operative
Bank, Thiruvananthapuram and one G.Jayakumar @ Anad Jayan as
respondents seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1
and 2 to take immediate steps for allowing Sri.B.Appukuttan Nair who
had been delegated to the 2nd respondent-Bank to assume charge
after removing the third respondent who had been nominated as the
delegate of the petitioner-Bank to the 2nd respondent-Bank and also
for a declaration that the delegation of the third respondent to
represent the petitioner-Bank in the 2nd respondent-Bank ceased to
exist with effect from 8.1.2004, the date on which the newly elected
committee assumed charge. The petitioner-Bank states that the
elected committee of the Bank had been removed and an
Administrative Committee assumed office for the administration of
the Bank in December, 2001. The third respondent was a member of
the Administrative Committee. The Administrative Committee
nominated the third respondent as the delegate of the Bank to the 2nd
respondent-Bank. The Administrative Committee was removed when
W.P.C.Nos.30528 & 35087/05 – 2 –
a new Committee was elected on 28.12.2003. The new Committee
assumed charge on 8.1.2004. The new Committee adopted Ext.P2
resolution on 17.1.2004 to withdraw the nomination of the third
respondent to the 2nd respondent-Bank and to nominate
Sri.B.Appukuttan Nair, a member of the Director Board of the
petitioner-Bank as delegate of the Bank to the 2nd respondent-Bank.
Even though copies of Ext.P2 had been forwarded to the 2nd
respondent and also to the 1st respondent, no steps have been taken
for withdrawing the nomination of the third respondent and to bring
into effect the nomination of Appukuttan Nair as delegate of the Bank
to the 2nd respondent-Bank in spite of several requests in that regard.
Various letters were sent on behalf of the Bank by the President to
the 1st respondent reminding him about Ext.P2 resolution. But those
letters were of no avail. Finally the first respondent was requested to
take urgent steps for recognising Mr.Appukuttan Nair as delegate of
the Bank to the District Co-operative Bank and allow him to assume
charge as such. Ext.P3 is copy of that letter. The grievance of the
petitioner is that no steps have been taken on Ext.P3 so far. It is on
the above averments that the petitioner refers to Rule 46(a) and (g)
of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules and have filed the Writ
W.P.C.Nos.30528 & 35087/05 – 3 –
Petition for the reliefs already indicated.
2. W.P.C.No.35087 of 2005 is filed by Sri.Anad Jayan, the third
respondent in W.P.C.No.30528 of 2005 arraying the Registrar of Co-
operative Societies, Thiruvananthapuram, the District Co-operative
Bank, Thiruvananthapuram, Anad Farmer’s Service Co-operative
Bank, Thiruvananthapuram and Sri.Appukuttan Nair as respondents.
Ext.P1 is copy of the resolution by which the petitioner was delegated
to the District Co-operative Bank, Thiruvananthapuram and Ext.P1(a)
is the authorisation to the petitioner for contesting election to the
Director Board of the District Co-operative Bank, Trivandrum. The
petitioner submits that he was sent as delegate of the Anad Farmers
Service Co-operative Bank at a time when that Bank was managed by
a U.D.F.Board. But in the subsequent election the administration of
the Bank has fallen into the hands of the L.D.F.Board. So the
L.D.F.Board has withdrawn the petitioner’s delegation on 17.1.2004
and deputed the 4th respondent as delegate to the 2nd respondent-
Bank. Alleging that the untimely withdrawal of delegation of the
petitioner is a political game to see that a U.D.F. member looses his
Director Board membership in the District Co-operative Bank and an
attempt to topple the Board of Directors of the District Co-operative
W.P.C.Nos.30528 & 35087/05 – 4 –
Bank itself, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking the
following reliefs:
1. A writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 3 not to take
any action for the petitioner loosing his membership in the Board of
Directors of the 2nd respondent-Bank before the expiry of the term for
which he was elected to the Board.
2. A declaration that by withdrawal of delegation of the petitioner in
the general body of the District Co-operative Bank,
Thiruvananthapuram his election to the Board of Directors of the
Bank is not affected as his election to the Board was as a result of
expression of desire of the members of the general body of that
Bank.
3. A declaration that election to a Board can be set aside only by a
properly constituted election petition as per Section 69 of the Kerala
Co-operative Societies Act and that the same cannot be allowed to be
achieved indirectly by withdrawal of his delegation as it is ultra vires
to the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.
3. I have heard the submissions of Mr.V.N.Achutha Kurup,
Senior Counsel for the petitioner in W.P.C.No.30528 of 2005,
Mr.D.Somasundaram, counsel for the petitioner in W.P.C.No.35087 of
W.P.C.Nos.30528 & 35087/05 – 5 –
2005 and Mr.T.R.Harikumar, Standing Counsel for the Trivandrum
District Co-operative Bank Ltd. My attention was drawn by the
counsel to Section 28 of the Co-operative Societies Act and Rule 46
(a) and (g) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. Counsel places
reliance on various judicial precedents particularly the judgment of
the Division Bench of this court in K.N.Gangadharan Nair v.
George O.Thettayil (1993(2) K.L.J. 864).
4. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the bar
and having gone through the statutory provisions, namely Rules 46
(a) and (g) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 and the
Division Bench judgment of this court in K.N.Gangadharan Nair v.
George O.Thettayil (1993(2) K.L.J. 864), I am of the view that
since Anad Jayan ceased to be a member of the Committee of the
Anad Farmer’s Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., his delegation by that
Bank to the Director Board of the Central Society, the
Thiruvananthapuram District Co-operative Bank Ltd. also ceases.
Under these circumstances, Writ Petition No.35087 of 2005 will
stand dismissed and Writ Petition No.30528 of 2005 will stand
disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 therein to take immediate
steps for allowing Mr.B.Appukuttan Nair who had already been
W.P.C.Nos.30528 & 35087/05 – 6 –
delegated by the 2nd respondent-Bank to assume charge after
removing the third respondent if Mr.Appukuttan Nair has not already
been permitted to assume charge of the Director Board of the District
Co-operative Bank. The needful will be done by respondents 1 and 2
in W.P.C.No.30528 of 2005 within two weeks of receiving a copy of
this judgment.
srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE