Punukkannoor Deshabhivardhini … vs State Of Kerala on 27 July, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20998 of 2009(T)


1. PUNUKKANNOOR DESHABHIVARDHINI SERVICE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/07/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                   -------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No.20998 of 2009
             ---------------------------------
               Dated, this the 27th day of July, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

In this writ petition, although there is a challenge against

Ext.P5 order, I do not think it necessary for this Court to consider

the same.

2. The petitioner, a Co-operative Bank, was issued Ext.P3

show cause notice calling upon it to file its explanation against

changing of classification of the Society into a Non-Agricultural

Credit Society. The petitioner filed Ext.P4 reply. Over-ruling the

objection raised, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P5, changing the

classification of the Society as proposed in Ext.P2. Aggrieved by the

said order, they have filed Ext.P7 appeal before the 1st respondent

invoking its powers under Section 83(1)(j) of the Co-operative

Societies Act, and the appeal is pending. Apprehending coercive

action pursuant to Ext.P5, and complaining of delay on the part of

the 1st respondent in passing orders on Ext.P7, this writ petition is

filed.

WP(C) No.20998/2009
-2-

3. Having regard to the pendency of Ext.P7 appeal referred

to above, this writ petition is disposed of with the following

directions:-

That the 1st respondent shall consider Ext.P7 appeal with notice to

the parties, and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within

eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is clarified

that in the meanwhile, it will be open to the petitioner to seek

appropriate interlocutory orders from the 1st respondent itself, on

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

4. The petitioner to produce copy of this judgment before

the 1st respondent for compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg