Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.34 seconds)
Documents citing Azeeskutty vs The Returning Officer on 29 August, 2008

M.Stephen vs The State Co-Operative Election on 3 January, 2011

That issue is no longer res-integra in view of the decision of this Court in Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer (supra). The learned counsel for the petitioner also raised a contention that the third respondent society is not a primary credit WPC No.38571/2010 4 society so as to attract the applicability of section 28(1C) of the Act and that it is a primary agricultural credit society. The term "primary agricultural credit society" is defined in section 2(oa) of the Kerala Co-Operative Societies Act to mean a service co-operative society, a service co-operative bank, a farmers service co-operative bank and a rural bank, the principal object of which is to undertake agricultural credit activities and has its area of operation confined to a Village, Panchayat or a Municipality.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - P N Ravindran - Full Document

Thomas K vs The State Co-Operative Election ... on 20 June, 2014

5. Heard. Section 28A mandates that three seats have to be reserved for women members and one seat for persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. A perusal of Exts.P1 and P2 shows that, such reservation has been provided. The question therefore is, whether such reservation could be provided, without formally amending the by laws of the society. The above question has been considered by this Court in Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer (supra) and it has been held that, in situations where the election is not held on ward basis, the Board of Directors could provide for reservation without amending the by laws.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S Kuriakose - Full Document

N.Surendran vs Poovattur East Service Co-Operative ... on 9 December, 2014

(ix) was added w.e.f. 26.11.2014. Pointing out these facts and relying on the judgments of this Court in Narayanan v. Maloth Service Co-op. Bank (1986 KLT 957), Gopinathan Nair v. Senior Inspector of Co-op. Societies (1986 KLT 1269), Rajendran v. State Co-operative Election Commission [2004 (1) KLT 1026], Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer [2008 (4) KLT 165] and Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala [2011 (3) KLT SN 51 (Case.No.48)], the learned counsel contended that the WA Nos.75 & 80/15 : 6 : postponed election can be conducted only in accordance with the Act and the Rules as amended. Therefore, according to the counsel, the direction of the learned Single Judge to resume the process of election from where it was stopped is untenable and illegal.
Kerala High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - A Dominic - Full Document

N.Surendran vs Poovattur East Service Co-Operative ... on 9 December, 2014

(ix) was added w.e.f. 26.11.2014. Pointing out these facts and relying on the judgments of this Court in Narayanan v. Maloth Service Co-op. Bank (1986 KLT 957), Gopinathan Nair v. Senior Inspector of Co-op. Societies (1986 KLT 1269), Rajendran v. State Co-operative Election Commission [2004 (1) KLT 1026], Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer [2008 (4) KLT 165] and Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala [2011 (3) KLT SN 51 (Case.No.48)], the learned counsel contended that the WA Nos.75 & 80/15 : 6 : postponed election can be conducted only in accordance with the Act and the Rules as amended. Therefore, according to the counsel, the direction of the learned Single Judge to resume the process of election from where it was stopped is untenable and illegal.
Kerala High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 6 - A Dominic - Full Document

K.R.Rajendra Prasad vs The Kerala Kerakarshaka Sahakarana

3. Shorn of details, the contention raised by the petitioner is that as the by-laws contemplate filling up of only 9 seats, elections could not have been held to 11 seats in the manner done pursuant to Ext.P2. By Ext.P2 in addition to the 9 members who are required to be elected in terms of bye-law 7, the State Election Commission also notified that a woman representative and a representative of the scheduled cast/scheduled tribes shall also be elected from among the President/Chairman of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies/Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Banks and Primary Co-operative Marketing Societies. It is contended that elections could not have been held without amending the bye-laws. The issue raised by the petitioner is covered against him by the decision of a learned single Judge of this Court in Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer (2008 (4) KLT 165) wherein also it was contended that the notification for election to seats in excess of the total number of seats which could be filled up in terms of the bye-laws is illegal. Overruling the said WPC No.4703/2010 3 contention, the learned single Judge held that in view of the mandate of section 28A of the Act, elections could be held even without an amendment to the bye-laws to fill up more seats than the number of seats prescribed by the bye-laws. The challenge to the election held pursuant to Ext.P2 notification cannot therefore be sustained.
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - P N Ravindran - Full Document

Sajikumar.S vs Mangalamuttathu on 28 August, 2014

5. The learned counsel for the appellants relied on the provisions of the Constitution (97th amendment) Act, 2011, provisions of Section 28-A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies W.A.Nos.1719, 1723 & 1753 of 2014 3 Act and the decisions of this Court in Gopinathan Vs. Senior Inspector of Co-op. Societies [1986 KLT 1269] and Azeeskutty Vs. Returning Officer [2008(4) KLT 165] and contended that it was well within the powers of the Executive Committee to have reserved 2 seats for women and that therefore the learned Single Judge ought not to have interfered with the election process.
Kerala High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A Dominic - Full Document

Thomas Jacob Aged 58 Years vs State Of Kerala on 23 December, 2010

It is thus obvious from the above amendment brought in to Section 28A that it provides for reservation of 3 seats for women in the committee of a society. The said amendment came into force with effect from 28.4.2010. Ext.P2 notification would reveal that it was issued on 19.11.2010. Thus it is obvious that the notification has been issued subsequent to coming into force of Ext.P4. Merely because the bye-laws of the second respondent society was not amended in terms of Ext.P4 amendment election cannot be permitted to be conducted in terms of the bye-laws ignoring the statutory amendment. The additional 5th respondent is not bound by the bye-laws, but bound by the provisions of the Act. In short, since Ext.P2 notification has been issued subsequent to the amendment to Section 28A of the Act the additional 5th respondent could not have and would not have issued Ext.P2 ignoring the amended provisions of section 28A and in tune with the provisions under the bye-laws. I am fortified in my view by a decision of this Court reported in Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer(2008(4) KLT165).
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - C T Ravikumar - Full Document

Thomas Jacob Aged 58 Years vs State Of Kerala on 23 December, 2010

It is thus obvious from the above amendment brought in to Section 28A that it provides for reservation of 3 seats for women in the committee of a society. The said amendment came into force with effect from 28.4.2010. Ext.P2 notification would reveal that it was issued on 19.11.2010. Thus it is obvious that the notification has been issued subsequent to coming into force of Ext.P4. Merely because the bye-laws of the second respondent society was not amended in terms of Ext.P4 amendment election cannot be permitted to be conducted in terms of the bye-laws ignoring the statutory amendment. The additional 5th respondent is not bound by the bye-laws, but bound by the provisions of the Act. In short, since Ext.P2 notification has been issued subsequent to the amendment to Section 28A of the Act the additional 5th respondent could not have and would not have issued Ext.P2 ignoring the amended provisions of section 28A and in tune with the provisions under the bye-laws. I am fortified in my view by a decision of this Court reported in Azeeskutty v. Returning Officer(2008(4) KLT165).
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - C T Ravikumar - Full Document
1