{"id":138641,"date":"2009-10-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009"},"modified":"2018-09-09T17:28:42","modified_gmt":"2018-09-09T11:58:42","slug":"t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 2871 of 2009(P)\n\n\n1. T.V.RAVEENDRAN, 57 YEARS, S\/O.GOPALAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. K.MUHAMMED ALI, 44 YEARS, S\/O.UMMER HAJI\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KERALA STATE CO.OP.ELECTION COMMISSION,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO.OP.SOCIETIES\n\n3. RETURNING OFFICER TO THE ELECTION TO THE\n\n4. MATTANUR CO.OP.RURAL BANK LTD.NO.F.1228,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN\n\n Dated :21\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n            THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.\n                   -------------------------------------------\n                    W.P(C).No.2871 OF 2009\n                  -------------------------------------------\n             Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009\n\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
1.The State Co-operative Election Commission, hereinafter<\/p>\n
  referred to as the ‘Commission’, notified election to the<\/p>\n
  committee of     the 4th respondent, a co-operative bank, of<\/p>\n
  which, the petitioners are members.                         The petitioners’<\/p>\n
  nominations were rejected on the ground that either the<\/p>\n
  proposer or the seconder or both of them lacked the<\/p>\n
  qualifications mentioned in clause 22 (B) of the byelaws of the<\/p>\n
  society.   Petitioners seek a declaration that no election has<\/p>\n
  been validly held at all.         According to them, 11 out of 24<\/p>\n
  nominations were rejected and one candidate withdrew,<\/p>\n
  thereby paving way for the continuance of the majority of the<\/p>\n
  members of the existing managing committee declared elected<\/p>\n
  as unopposed.      They seek a further declaration that the<\/p>\n
  amendment brought to the byelaws, as evidenced by Ext.P2,<\/p>\n
  are void, inoperative and unenforcible since the stipulations<\/p>\n
  contained therein regarding certain qualifications of the<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                            Page numbers<\/p>\n
  candidate’s proposers and seconders are contrary to the<\/p>\n
  statutory provisions contained in the Kerala Co-operative<\/p>\n
  Societies Act, 1969, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ and the<\/p>\n
  Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, hereinafter, the<\/p>\n
  ‘Rules’, for short. They seek issuance of a writ of mandamus to<\/p>\n
  the Commission to notify the election afresh from the stage of<\/p>\n
  acceptance of nomination papers without insisting on<\/p>\n
  conditions in Ext.P2, particularly to proposers and seconders,<\/p>\n
  and to accept all valid nominations on such basis and then, to<\/p>\n
  hold polling in accordance with law.         They also seek a<\/p>\n
  mandamus directing the Joint Registrar to desist from<\/p>\n
  permitting the persons who claim elected unopposed, entering<\/p>\n
  on office.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2.According to the petitioners, the amendment evidenced by<\/p>\n
  Ext.P2 had been brought about secretly and without notifying<\/p>\n
  it to the members or publishing it in the notice board of the<\/p>\n
  society, as required by law.     The petitioners state that on<\/p>\n
  enquiry, they were furnished with the stipulations in the<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                           Page numbers<\/p>\n
  amended byelaws which were published on 5.1.2009, the<\/p>\n
  previous day of publication of the notification.<\/p>\n
3.The nomination of the first petitioner was rejected on the<\/p>\n
  ground that neither the proposer nor the seconder of that<\/p>\n
  nomination possess the qualification mentioned in clause 22<\/p>\n
  (B) of the amended byelaws. The nomination of the second<\/p>\n
  petitioner was rejected on the ground that the seconder to that<\/p>\n
  nomination did not have such qualification.     The plea in that<\/p>\n
  regard is that on the face of Rule 35A of the Rules, which<\/p>\n
  provide that every nomination paper shall be signed by two<\/p>\n
  members, whose names are included in the list of members<\/p>\n
  and one of the members shall sign the form as proposer and<\/p>\n
  the other as seconder for the nomination; there cannot be any<\/p>\n
  further prescription by byelaws as to qualification for being a<\/p>\n
  proposer of seconder other than the mere fact that they are<\/p>\n
  persons whose names are included in the list of members.<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                             Page numbers<\/p>\n
4.The 4th respondent society has filed a counter affidavit, sworn<\/p>\n
  to by the secretary of the society. Ext.R4(a) is the notification<\/p>\n
  issued by the Commission under Rule 35A of the Rules on<\/p>\n
  6.1.2009.     List of valid nominations was published on<\/p>\n
  20.1.2009, after considering the nominations submitted on<\/p>\n
  19.1.2009 and after the time for withdrawal of nomination,<\/p>\n
  final list was published by the Returning Officer on 21.1.2009<\/p>\n
  [Ext.R4(b)]. According to the 4th respondent, when this writ<\/p>\n
  petition was filed on 27.1.2009, the publication of the final list<\/p>\n
  of candidates had taken place and there was no question of<\/p>\n
  any further election by polling since there was no contest. The<\/p>\n
  4th respondent, accordingly, impeaches the sustainability of<\/p>\n
  this writ petition on the ground that those persons are entitled<\/p>\n
  to be treated as elected in terms of Ext.R4(b) declaration.<\/p>\n
5. It is specifically pleaded by the 4th respondent in para 5 of its<\/p>\n
  counter affidavit that the amendment to the byelaws cannot be<\/p>\n
  impeached in writ jurisdiction and, still further, that the<\/p>\n
  proposal for amending the byelaws to the impugned extent<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                          Page numbers<\/p>\n
 was notified for consideration in the General Body of the<\/p>\n
 society in its meeting scheduled on 25.3.2006. Exts.R4(c) and<\/p>\n
 R4(d) are the newspaper publications of the notices of that<\/p>\n
 meeting. It is also pleaded that apart from paper publication,<\/p>\n
 the proposal for such amendment was communicated to the<\/p>\n
 members along with the annual report which contained the<\/p>\n
 proposal for the amendment. Ext.R4(e) is produced to prove<\/p>\n
 that the amendment was approved by the General Body and<\/p>\n
 the said modifications to the byelaws were approved by the<\/p>\n
 Joint Registrar and registered on 2.11.2006. It is pleaded in<\/p>\n
 the counter affidavit that the minutes of the General Body<\/p>\n
 Meeting will show the deliberations on the amendment in<\/p>\n
 question and the approval given by the General Body to that<\/p>\n
 amendment. It is further specifically contended in para 6 of<\/p>\n
 the counter affidavit that the General Body of the society, for<\/p>\n
 the co-operative year 2006-07, was convened after granting<\/p>\n
 the registration of the impugned amendment as per Ext.R4(e)<\/p>\n
 and that in the said meeting also, the approval and the<\/p>\n
 registration of the amendment as aforesaid was brought to the<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                            Page numbers<\/p>\n
  notice of the General Body in that meeting held on 30.3.2007.<\/p>\n
  With those pleadings in para 6, it is pointed out by the 4th<\/p>\n
  respondent that the amendment is not only in order, but does<\/p>\n
  not warrant interference by this Court on any count.<\/p>\n
6. Section 12 of the Act provides that no amendment to any<\/p>\n
  byelaws shall be valid unless such amendment has been<\/p>\n
  registered under the Act. The grant of approval of amendment<\/p>\n
  under Section 12 of the Act is a statutory function. Going by<\/p>\n
  the pleadings as noticed above, the uncontroverted statement<\/p>\n
  of the 4th respondent is that the amendments in question were<\/p>\n
  brought in on the basis of the decision of the General Body in<\/p>\n
  the year 2006 and that such amendment has been approved by<\/p>\n
  the competent statutory authority. That decision, as of now,<\/p>\n
  stands final. The said amendment to the byelaws, with the<\/p>\n
  registration, makes the provisions which are incorporated into<\/p>\n
  the byelaws, binding on all the members of the society.<\/p>\n
  Therefore, any challenge to those byelaws, if at all, could<\/p>\n
  necessarily be had only by recourse to statutory proceedings<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                            Page numbers<\/p>\n
 against the decision of the Joint Registrar granting approval to<\/p>\n
 those amendments to the byelaws. The question whether Rule<\/p>\n
 35A of the Rules exclude such an amendment is left<\/p>\n
 unanswered in this writ petition because the plea that the<\/p>\n
 amendment to the byelaws has been made in contravention of<\/p>\n
 the Act and Rules could be considered in a statutory challenge<\/p>\n
 to the decision of the Joint Registrar granting registration.<\/p>\n
 Once the competent authority has granted approval, any<\/p>\n
 contradiction between the Act, Rules and byelaws would have<\/p>\n
 to necessarily stand for a scrutiny, first, only by the statutory<\/p>\n
 authorities and without exhausting those remedies, it is<\/p>\n
 inappropriate to issue a writ in exercise of authority under<\/p>\n
 Article 226 of the Constitution, interfering with the byelaws of<\/p>\n
 a society, which is essentially, a non-statutory material. Not<\/p>\n
 only that, the quality of the right of a person to be a member of<\/p>\n
 a co-operative society also does not generate sufficient locus to<\/p>\n
 insist on the issuance of a writ of certiorari or seek issuance of<\/p>\n
 a writ of mandamus in relation to the byelaws of a co-operative<\/p>\n
 society.\n<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                           Page numbers<\/p>\n
7.The petitioners do not have a case that the rejection of their<\/p>\n
  nominations is not in terms of the byelaws. Their only plea is<\/p>\n
  that the byelaws amendment referred in Ext.P2 was a secret<\/p>\n
  exercise. They attempt to show that Ext.P2 is issued only on<\/p>\n
  5.1.2009, the date shown therein. This is not only repudiated,<\/p>\n
  but it is pleaded that such amendment was brought in by the<\/p>\n
  due process, way back in 2006 and that the said amendment<\/p>\n
  has been approved by the competent authority.        Ext.P2 is<\/p>\n
  evidently only a further issuance of the true copy of the said<\/p>\n
  amendment.     Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to<\/p>\n
  challenge the correctness of the rejection of the nominations<\/p>\n
  since their nominations have been rejected on the basis of the<\/p>\n
  byelaws as it stood while the election was notified by the<\/p>\n
  Commission.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
8.Be that as it may, relying on the decision of the Apex Court in<\/p>\n
  Veena Kumari Tandon v. Neelam Bhalla<\/a> [(2007) 12 SCC<\/p>\n
  764], learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the<\/p>\n
  provisions in the byelaws are contrary to the statutory<\/p>\n
WPC.2871\/09<\/p>\n
                          Page numbers<\/p>\n
 provisions and inconsistency in that regard is a ground to<\/p>\n
 interfere with the process.    As already noted, the byelaws<\/p>\n
 stand with approval of the statutory authority and parties have<\/p>\n
 statutory modes to challenge such approvals. I do not find that<\/p>\n
 as a ground to interfere in the matter in the light of what is<\/p>\n
 stated in the preceding paragraphs.\n<\/p>\n
 For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is dismissed<\/p>\n
 without prejudice to the right of the petitioners, if any, to<\/p>\n
 challenge the amendment of the byelaws, in accordance with<\/p>\n
 law. No costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                              Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                        THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
\n                                              Judge
\nkkb.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 2871 of 2009(P) 1. T.V.RAVEENDRAN, 57 YEARS, S\/O.GOPALAN … Petitioner 2. K.MUHAMMED ALI, 44 YEARS, S\/O.UMMER HAJI Vs 1. KERALA STATE CO.OP.ELECTION COMMISSION, … Respondent 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO.OP.SOCIETIES 3. RETURNING OFFICER […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-138641","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nT.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1514,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\",\"name\":\"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009"},"wordCount":1514,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009","name":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election ... on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-09T11:58:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-v-raveendran-vs-kerala-state-co-op-election-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.V.Raveendran vs Kerala State Co.Op.Election … on 21 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138641","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=138641"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138641\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=138641"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=138641"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=138641"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}