High Court Kerala High Court

Sherly D’Cruz vs The Managing Committee Of The … on 2 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Sherly D’Cruz vs The Managing Committee Of The … on 2 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17021 of 2010(C)


1. SHERLY D'CRUZ, VALAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE

3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, CONSUMERFED

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :02/06/2010

 O R D E R
                      K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
                   -----------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C) No.17021 of 2010
                   -----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the action

of the second and third respondents in issuing Ext.P3 proceedings.

As per Ext.P3, the employees of the first respondent named therein

have been made liable for the stock deficit that was detected. It is

also stated therein that criminal proceedings would be initiated

against the said persons, if the amounts demanded were not

remitted. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the impugned

proceedings are absolutely without jurisdiction and the respondents

are not conferred with any power to issue such proceedings.

2. Adv.M.Sasindran takes notice for all the respondents. He

points out that what has been done as per Ext.P3 is only to direct

the persons who were responsible for the deficit stock to make good

the loss that was caused to the Society. It is also pointed out that if

the petitioner has any grievance in the matter, the statutory remedy

under Section 69 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 is available

to her.

3. Since the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy

wpc No.17021/2010 2

under Section 69 of the Co-operative Societies Act, I do not think it

necessary to entertain this Writ Petition. This Writ Petition is

accordingly dismissed, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner

to challenge the impugned proceedings under Section 69 of the

Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge

css/