Kerala High Court
Sacheendran Nair vs The Joint Registrar Of Co-Operative ...
Author: Dama Seshadri Naidu
Bench: Dama Seshadri Naidu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2016/15TH CHAITHRA, 1938
WP(C).No. 12366 of 2016 (U)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------
SACHEENDRAN NAIR
CHIEF PROMOTER,
SARASA BHAVAN,
SOORANAD NORTH VILLAGE,
SOORANAD P.O,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.D.SREEKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
-------------------
1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL),
CIVIL STATION,
KOLLAM 690 001.
2. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN 695 001.
R BY SRI. V. VIJULAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 12366 of 2016 (U)
---------------------------------
: 2 :
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
----------------------------
P1. COPY OF THE MINUTES AND RESOLUTION PASSED KUNNATHOOR URBAN
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, CHAKKUVALLY, SOORANAD.
P2. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION AS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
UNDER THE KERALA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETES ACT, 1969 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 25.8.14 AND ITS REQUISITION FEES REMITTANCE REPORT.
P3. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8.2.16 IN WPC 25225/14 OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT.
P4. COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER NO.Q.6895/2014/L.DIS.DATED 1.10.14
ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
------------------------------
/True Copy/
P.A to Judge.
rv
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
----------------------------------
W.P. (C) No. 12366 of 2016 (U)
----------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2016.
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader, apart from perusing the record.
2. The petitioner, one of the promoters of the proposed society, has a grievance that the promoters' application for registration of the society has been rejected by the first respondent without any justification.
3. Pending the writ petition, the first respondent seems to have addressed Ext.P5 communication to the petitioner informing him that if the promoters re-submit their application, the first respondent will re-consider it.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application is still with the Assistant Registrar, who can, as well, forward it to the first respondent. He has further submitted that this Court may dispose of the writ petition by setting aside the earlier order of rejection passed by the first respondent and giving him a direction to re-consider Ext.P2 application. W.P.(C.) No. 11462/2016 -2-
5. In response, the learned Government Pleader has submitted that the first respondent is willing to recall the earlier order of rejection and re-consider Ext.P2 application.
6. It is the persistent submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P2 has not been returned to the petitioner. And it seems to be lying with the Assistant Registrar concerned.
7. In the facts and circumstances, this Court makes it clear that the Assistant Registrar or any other Officer, who has Ext.P2 records with him, shall return them to the petitioner, who, in turn, should re- submit them through proper channel to the first respondent to enable the said authority to re-consider the application within one month from the date of re-submitting the application.
With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.
sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.
rv W.P.(C.) No. 11462/2016 -3-