Kerala High Court
Trichur District Co-Op.Rubber ... vs State Of Kerala
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic, Anil K.Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/1ST KARTHIKA, 1936
WA.No. 1449 of 2014 () IN WP(C).21370/2014
--------------------------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21370/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 18/8/14
APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS IN WPC NO 21370/2014:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. TRICHUR DISTRICT CO-OP.RUBBER MARKETING SOCIETY
HAVING REGN. NO.285, AMBAKKADAN KINAR JUNCTION
THRISSUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
JAMES JOSEPH.V., AGED 50, S/O.LATE OUSEPH, THRISSUR - 680 001.
2. SRI.P.D.CHACKO, AGED 72,
S/O.LATE DEVASSYA
PRESIDENT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
THRISSUR DISTRICT, CO-OP, RUBBER MARKETING SOCIETY
HAVING REGN. NO.285, AMBAKKADAN KINAR JUNCTION
THRISSUR DISTRICT, THRISSUR - 680 001.
BY ADVS.SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE
SRI.P.V.VARGHESE (KANJIRAMATTOM)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WPC NO 21370/2014:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
DEPT. OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT
TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.
2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES
O/O.THE REGISTRAR, TRIVANDRUM -695 001
3. THE DIRECTOR OF CO-OP. AUDIT,
O/O THE DIRECTOR OF CO-OP. AUDIT
TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.
4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR (MARKETING),
CO-OP. SOCIETIES
O/O. THE REGISTRAR CO-OP SOCIETIES)
TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.
5. ASST.REGISTRAR (GENERAL)
SAHAKARANA BHAVAN OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE
THRISSUR - 680 003.
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.JAMAL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-10-2014, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC & ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ.
===============================
Writ Appeal No. 1449 of 2014
====================
Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2014
J U D G M E N T
Antony Dominic, J.
The appellants approached this Court challenging Ext.P5 demand by which audit fee at the rate of `1,00,000/- per year was levied on the appellants for completing audit for the period 1999- 2011. The writ petition was disposed of by the learned single Judge relegating the appellants to pursue the remedies as provided under Section 83(1)(j) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. It is aggrieved by this judgment, the appeal is filed.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that having regard to the provisions of Rule 65 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, audit fee that can be levied on the Society can be only at the rate that was prevailing at the respective year in relation to which the audit was completed. According to him, when audit got delayed due to the fault of the department and completed belatedly, Society cannot be made liable W.A.No.1449/14 : 2 :
for the audit fee that was revised subsequent to the year in relation to which the audit was completed. Therefore, he says that levy of audit fee at the rate of `1,00,000/-, which rate was introduced w.e.f. 2010, could not have been levied for any year prior to 2010.
4. We have considered the submissions made.
5. The resolution of this dispute necessarily involves question as to why the audit got delayed and if the same was due to any reason that was attributable to the Society also. Ext.P3 refers to the information that was furnished to the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies by the Joint Registrar that the group concurrent audit was not conducted earlier any time prior to 2011, on account of the failure of the Society in submitting the application thereof. This, prima facie, indicates that there are some laches on the part of the appellants also. In any case, this is a factual question that is incapable of being resolved in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the learned single Judge was therefore justified in relegating the appellants to pursue their remedies under Section 83(i)(j) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.
W.A.No.1449/14
: 3 :
6. We, therefore, do not think that the appellants have made out a case for interference.
Writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge