Kerala High Court
The Board Of Directors Of The Kerala ... vs The Jt.Registrar Of Co-Op.Societies ... on 17 August, 2012
Author: K.Surendra Mohan
Bench: K.Surendra Mohan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/1ST PHALGUNA 1934
WP(C).No. 4892 of 2013 (J)
--------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE KERALA HEALTH
SERVICE PARAMEDICAL EMPLOYESS WELFARE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
LTD.NO.K.1072,
CHINGAVANAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
BY ADVS.SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR
SMT.V.BEENA
SMT.K.V.SUPRABHA
RESPONDENTS:
------------
1. THE JT.REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES (GENERAL),
KOTTAYAM-686 001.
2. INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
KUMARAKOM UNIT,
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL),
KOTTAYAM-686 001
(APPOINTED AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE KERALA HEALTH
SERVICE PARAMEDICAL EMPLOYEES WELFARE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
LTD.NO.K.1072,
CHINGAVANAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM).
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RINNIE STEPHEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 4892 of 2013 (J)
A P P E N D I X
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.HM/5170/12 DTED 8-7-2012 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)19636/2012 DATED 17-8-2012.
EXT-P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
3.9.2012.
EXT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.HM 5170/2012 DATED 1-2-2013 OF THE
IST RESPONDENT.
EXT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.KM 442/2013 DATED 14-2-2013
OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A TO JUDGE
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P(c) No.4892 of 2013-J
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th February, 2013
J U D G M E N T
As per Ext.P3 order dated 01.02.2013 passed under Section 32 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act' for short), the elected Board of Directors of the Kerala Health Service Paramedical Employees Welfare Co- operative Society Ltd.No.K.1072, Chingavanam, has been superseded. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the said order of the 1st respondent.
2. According to Sri B.S.Swathi Kumar, who appears for the petitioner, as per Ext.P1 show cause notice dated 08.07.2012, the petitioner was directed to explain the charges levelled against the Society. Though the petitioner sought for time to submit objections, time was not granted. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P(c) No.19636 of 2012. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment W.P(c) No.4892 of 2013-J 2 granting time to the petitioner. Accordingly, Ext.P2(a) explanation was submitted on 03.09.2012. However, it is alleged that without considering the objections in Ext.P2(a), Ext.P3 order has been passed. Particular reference is made to the statement in Ext.P3 that in spite of the grant of sufficient opportunity to file objection, no objections were in fact submitted. According to the learned counsel, Ext.P3 has therefore been passed without even taking note of Ext.P2(a). It is further contended that the financing bank was not consulted before issuing Ext.P3. Therefore, it is contended that Ext.P3 is unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
3. The learned Government Pleader refutes the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner by pointing out that in the show cause notice, the allegations levelled are extremely serious. The Society has disbursed loans to the tune of Rs.76,75,000/- to its members during the years 2007-2008 and 2008-09. The funds were obtained from the District Co- operative Bank. However, repayment of the loans are all remaining in default. Consequently, an amount of Rs.56,15,477/- remains to be recovered as principal amount and an amount of W.P(c) No.4892 of 2013-J 3 Rs.11,42,742/- is due as interest. The Society does not have a paid Secretary. It is also stated that even the members of the Board of Directors are defaulters to the Society. To the above charges, it is pointed out that, the petitioner has offered no explanation in Ext.P2(a). On the contrary, the allegations are to a great extent admitted in the said explanation. Therefore, Ext.P3 has been issued finding that there are serious irregularities in the functioning of the Society. For the above reasons, it is contended that Ext.P3 is sustainable.
4. Heard. A perusal of Ext.P2(a) shows that the allegations in Ext.P1 show cause notice are more or less admitted by the explanation of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that a total amount of Rs.76,75,000/- has been disbursed among the members of the Society as loans and that recovery of the loan amounts is remaining in default. The reason stated in Ext.P2(a) is that the recovery of loans could not be pursued because the paid Secretary of the Society had resigned. No substitute could be obtained for the meagre amount that the Society is able to offer as salary to a Secretary. To the allegation that the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Society and the General W.P(c) No.4892 of 2013-J 4 Manager of Co-operative Bank had visited the Society but found the same locked, the explanation is that, the President, Vice President and Peon of the Society had left the office of the Society for recovering the loan amounts due from the members and it was for the said reason that the Society was remaining closed. It is also admitted that the Society has not been able to recover the loan amounts correctly, because there was no paid Secretary in the Society. The explanation shows that the allegation contained in Ext.P1 to the effect that the people residing nearby had told that the Society was remaining closed on almost all days is also substantially admitted. The fact that there are arrears remaining to be recovered from the members towards the loans availed by them is also admitted in Ext.P2(a). What has been sought for in Ext.P2(a) is for some more time to remit the amounts that are remaining in default. The above being the situation, it is held that, the allegations levelled have not been seriously disputed by the petitioner. For the above reason, it follows that, there is no sufficient explanation in Ext.P2(a) for the charges levelled. I am not satisfied that this Writ Petition deserves to be entertained, for the further fact that W.P(c) No.4892 of 2013-J 5 the petitioner is entitled to challenge Ext.P3 in a statutory appeal under Section 83(1)(j) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.
For the above reasons, this Writ Petition is dismissed but, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to pursue their statutory remedy.
Sd/-
(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/