Kerala High Court
Prathapachandran.P vs Cochin Shipyard Staff Co-Operative on 14 December, 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
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/27TH POUSHA 1934
WP(C).No. 1726 of 2013 (M)
--------------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------
PRATHAPACHANDRAN.P,
GURUPREETHI, NURSERY SCHOOL ROAD, PUNNURUNNI
VYTTILA.P.O, KOCHI-19, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.SASIDHARAN
SRI.C.A.ANUPAMAN
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. COCHIN SHIPYARD STAFF CO-OPERATIVE
HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD. NO.E 346
REPRESENTED BY THE CONVENER OF
ITS ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE.
2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
ERNAKULAM.
3. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL),
KANAYANNUR CIRCLE ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-16.
R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. G. GOPAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 1726 of 2013 (M)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXT.P1- TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE BYE LAW OF THE IST RESPONDENT
SOCIETY.
EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 14.12.2012 IN
W.P[C]NOS.28862/12 & 21880/12 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.1.2012 ISSUED BY THE SOCIETY
TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P3(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE COVER CONTAINING EXT.P3 AND ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF ARC.NO.46 OF 2012 FILED THREE MEMBERS OF THE
SOCIETY BEFORE THE ARBITRATION COURT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF ARC.NO.47/12 FILED BY SUJA.P.S, BEFORE THE
ARBITRATION COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.H.M.7778/2012/L.DIS DT.6.12.2012
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
WP(C).No.1726 of 2013.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 17th January, 2013.
J U D G M E N T
The complaint of the petitioner is that the first respondent society that is being administered by an Administrative Committee is about to take a decision to make allotment of plots at its Chittoor Housing Project to various persons. For the purpose, a meeting is scheduled to be conducted today, 17.1.2013. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the entire issue regarding the allotment of plots is pending before the Co-operative Arbitration Court, Thiruvananthapuram in ARC.No.46/2012. Notice of the meeting proposed to be conducted was served on the petitioner only on 15.1.2013. Therefore, the petitioner contends that he has not got sufficient time to move the Co- operative Arbitration Court. It is also contended that any decision taken to allot plots as proposed, would render the WP(C).No.1726/2013.
2 Arbitration Case infructuous. Therefore, he seeks the issue of appropriate orders and directions restraining the Managing Committee of the first respondent from taking any decision in the above matter.
2. Heard counsel for the petitioner. The dispute regarding allotment of plots is pending consideration of the Co-operative Arbitration Court, Thiruvananthapuram in ARC.No.46/2012. According to the counsel for the petitioner, when an earlier attempt was made to take a similar decision to allot plots, the same had been restrained by an interim order issued by the Co-operative Arbitration Court. It is only because there is no time in the present case that the petitioner has not approached the said Court. However, it is to be noted that any decision to allot plots taken by the Managing Committee during the pendency of the proceedings, ARC.No.46/2012 can only be provisional and subject to the result of the said proceedings. Any such decision cannot render the proceedings before the Co- WP(C).No.1726/2013.
3 operative Arbitration Court, infructuous, as contended. The decision, if any, taken by the Managing Committee on 17.1.2013 can only be at the risk of being upset by the orders that may be passed by the Co-operative Arbitration Court in ARC.No.46/2012. In view of the above legal position, the apprehension of the petitioner is without any basis. The petitioner can move the Co-operative Arbitration Court seeking the issue of interim orders, if any decision is taken by the Managing Committee, as apprehended. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to move the Co-operative Arbitration Court for appropriate interim orders in the matter, this writ petition is dismissed.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-