Kerala High Court
N.V.Vipin vs The Nadapuram Panchayath Vanitha ... on 11 March, 2019
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1940
WP(C).No. 29476 of 2018
PETITIONER/S:
N.V.VIPIN, AGED 33 YEARS
MANDOLLATHIL VEEDU,
KODENCHERRY P.O, PURAMERI (VIA),
KODENCHERRY-673503
BY ADVS.
P.P.JACOB
P . GOPALAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE NADAPURAM PANCHAYATH VANITHA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM
LIMITED, D 2685, NADAPURAM,
KOZHIKODE-673504, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
673504
2 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G)
VADAKARA, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G), VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE-673101
3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G)
KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673004
4 THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE
AUDIT, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE -673101
5 MANOJ AROOR, ADVOCATE, DOMESTIC ENQUIRY OFFICER,
NADAPURAM PANCHAYATH VANITHA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM LTD.
NO. D 2685, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE-673504
BY ADVS.
SRI.MOHANAN V.T.K. - SC
SMT.C.S.SHEEJA.SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 29476/18
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who concedes to have been proceeded against under a disciplinary enquiry by the 1st respondent-Society, prays that certain documents be directed to be given to him by the Enquiry Officer, in charge of the said enquiry, or by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The petitioner's allegation is that even though he has preferred Ext.P8 before the Enquiry Officer, he was not favoured with the documents and therefore, that he has preferred Ext.P10 before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies alleging that the Enquiry Officer appears to be adamant in not affording him the documents requested by him. The petitioner says that in the absence of these documents, it will not be possible for him to conduct the enquiry properly.
2. Smt. C.S Sheeja, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the WPC 29476/18 3 official respondents, submits that a counter affidavit has been placed on record, wherein they clearly state that the request of the petitioner has been made only after the enquiry had been completed. She, therefore, says that the petitioner can raise these issues at the appropriate stage of the disciplinary proceedings and that this Court may not exercise any jurisdiction in this matter at this time.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, also affirms the submissions made by the learned Senior Government Pleader and says that the documents asked for by the petitioner are not relevant to the enquiry and that it may not be possible for the Society to give him all such documents.
4. Even though I hear Sri. P.P. Jacob, the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the documents sought for by his client in Exts.P8 WPC 29476/18 4 and P10 are vital to this case, I am certain that this Court cannot and should not intervene into an ongoing disciplinary action at this stage; particularly since, if the petitioner is able to establish that the Enquiry or the disciplinary proceedings are vitiated on account of the refusal to hand over these documents to him, he can certainly pursue his remedies before the appropriate Authority at the appropriate level which, I am certain, will be considered in its proper perspective. I, therefore, fail to understand why the petitioner should have come to this Court because it now appears to be premature, as it is conceded that the disciplinary proceedings are yet to be finalised, though the learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the enquiry is over.
In the afore circumstances, I see no reason to grant any of the reliefs sought for by the WPC 29476/18 5 petitioner and I leave liberty to him to pursue all contentions at the appropriate level, including before the disciplinary Authority or the Appellate Authority or before this Court, as is required in future; and I am certain that these are grounds that may be available to him to challenge the proceedings itself, rather than insisting that he be given the documents at this stage.
This writ petition is thus disposed of.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN RR JUDGE WPC 29476/18 6 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), VADAKARA TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY DATED 17.1.2013 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G) TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY DATED 14.6.2016.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT FURNISHED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G) VADAKARA, DATED 10.6.2016.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DISCIPLINARY SUB COMMITTEE TO THE PETITIONER DATED 11.4.2018.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 26.3.2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE DATED 31.3.2018 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FIELD BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 1.5.2018.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FURNISHED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DOMESTIC ENQUIRY OFFICER DATED 28.5.2018. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.8.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 18.8.2018.
WPC 29476/187 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 21.8.2018 WITH COPY TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXT R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE FIR