High Court Kerala High Court

The Government Servants … vs The Director Of Public … on 2 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
The Government Servants … vs The Director Of Public … on 2 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 15134 of 2009(J)


1. THE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS CO-OPERATIVE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

3. THE HEAD MASTER

4. SHRI. P.K.MOHANAN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :02/06/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    -------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No.15134 of 2009
              ---------------------------------
               Dated, this the 2nd day of June, 2009

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a Co-operative Society. According to the

petitioner, the 4th respondent had availed of two loans of

Rs.10,000/- each. Exts.P1 & P2 are the loan agreements and

Exts.P3 & P4 are the loan applications and employment certificates.

Default was committed and request was made to the 3rd respondent

for effecting recovery of the amount due to the petitioner.

2. Though, requests for recovery were received, the 3rd

respondent did not effect recovery. Complaints made to the 2nd

respondent also did not yield any result. The petitioner submits

that the failure of respondents 2 & 3 amounts to violation of Section

37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, and that it entails

consequences as provided under Section 94(5) of the Act.

According to him, this also in violation of the Kerala Financial Code.

It is stated that ignoring the request made for effecting recovery and

not to issue Non Liability Certificate, Ext.P12 Non Liability Certificate

was issued.

3. The petitioner says that in view of the above, he has

WP(C) No.15134/2009
-2-

moved the 1st respondent by filing Ext.P13 seeking to have his

grievances redressed and also praying to take action against

respondents 2 & 3. It is stated that even on Ext.P13, there has not

been any response. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is

filed.

4. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has urged

his grievances in Ext.P13, which has already been submitted to the

1st respondent, at this stage, I feel that their grievances can be

redressed by directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass

orders on Ext.P13.

5. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P13, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of

production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ

petition.

6. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment,

along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for

compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg