Kerala High Court
The Kerala State Co-Operative ... vs W.P.(C).No.10054/2020 :: 2 on 21 May, 2020
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
THURSDAY,THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2020/31ST VAISAKHA, 1942
W.P(C) NO.10054/2020
PETITIONER:
THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND
POST BOX NO.56,HEAD OFFICE, STATUE JUNCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
RESPONDENT
1. KERALA STATE FISHERMENS DEBT RELIEF COMMISSION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL
WHOLESALE MARKET COMPOUND, VENPALAVATTOM,
ANAYARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695029.
2. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT
OF CO-OPERATION,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,UP
UP HILL,MALAPPURAM-676505.
4. THE TIRUR CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT BANK,TIRUR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676101,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
5. AISHAVI,
W/O LATE MOOSA,KUTTAYINTEPURAKKAL HOUSE,
KUTTAYI.P.O,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676562.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS UPON PERUSING THE
PETITION AND THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SUPPORT OF WP(C) AND UPON
HEARING THE ARGUMENTS OF M/S NISHA GEORGE, ADVOCATE FOR THE
PETITIONER, SRI.P.G.SUNIL, STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AND SRI.K.P.HARISH, SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER FOR
RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 & THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).NO.10054/2020 :: 2 ::
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C).NO.10054 OF 2020
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of May, 2020
ORDER
Admit. The learned senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish takes notice for respondents 2 and 3. Sri.P.G.Sunil, the learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the 1st respondent. The petitioner shall serve notice on the 4 th and 5th respondents and produce proof of service of notice before the Registry within a week.
2. Post after three weeks for the counter affidavit of the respondents.
In the meanwhile, there shall be a stay of operation of Ext.P2 order to the extent it directs the petitioner to take over the waived liability of the 5 th respondent to the 4 th respondent. It is made clear that the findings in Ext.P1 order as regards the liability of the 5th respondent to the 4th respondent are not interfered with.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/21/5/2020