IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 31761 of 2008(F)
1. JOHN MATHEW, S/O.LATE MATHEW, AGED 50,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KADANADU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY TO CO-OPERATION (GENERAL)
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
4. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL)
5. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
6. SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KIDANGOOR SCB
For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :29/10/2008
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.31761 OF 2008
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2008
JUDGMENT
Having regard to the nature of the order being issued
hereunder, notice to the respondents dispensed with, preserving
their right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved.
2. The petitioner availed certain facilities from the first
respondent. Alleging that action is not being taken on his
complaint regarding the failure to extend to him the benefits of
certain loan waiver schemes, he filed a writ petition. That led to
Ext.P8 judgment, whereby, he stood relegated to the Joint
Registrar for consideration of his representation. In the
meanwhile, it appears that even before a copy of Ext.P8
judgment could reach the Joint Registrar, he had forwarded the
petitioner’s complaint to the Assistant Registrar, who, in turn,
has now issued Ext.P9, taking the view that the petitioner is not
entitled to the loan waiver scheme. The petitioner points out
that Exts.P4 and P9 are contradictory and there is no reason to
WPC.31761/08
Page numbers
state that he is to be deprived of the benefit of the loan waiver
scheme.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having
perused Exts.P4 and P9, I deem it appropriate that the Joint
Registrar hears the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P9 and takes a
decision at his end. Under such circumstances, this writ petition
is ordered directing that if the petitioner appears before the
third respondent and produces a copy of the judgment along
with a copy of this writ petition, the third respondent will hear
the petitioner and the first respondent and consider the relevant
materials and decide as to the correctness of Ext.P9. To aid such
action, it is ordered that all further proceedings on the basis of
Ext.P1 will stand suspended for a period of three months. The
Joint Registrar will ensure that a final decision is issued within
two months.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
Judge.
kkb.