Constitution of India, Art. 226 – Co-operative Societies Act and Rules, 1969 (Kerala) – Material suppression of Facts – Abuse of the process of the Court – taking serious note of the fact that petitioner has suppressed material facts, abused the processes of Court, interfered with the impartial and independent administration of justice, petitioner is not entitled to secure any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the writ petition is also liable to be dismissed with appropriate cost. Petitioner is liable to pay a cost of Rs.50,000/-, in that regard.
2016 (4) KLT SN 25 (C.No. 27) : 2016 (4) KHC 651
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
W.P.(C) No.24539 of 2016
Dated this the 19th day of August, 2016
PETITIONER A. ANIL KUMAR
BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SRI.C.P.SABARI SRI.HAFIS BABU
1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001.
2. ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE OF KOLIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.2665, REPRESENTED BY CONVENER OF ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE, KOLIYOOR, MUTTACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 523.
3. KOLIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.2665, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KOLIYOOR, MUTTACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 523.
4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
R1 & R4 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.PAUL VARGHESE R2 & R3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner who is a member of the 3 rd respondent Bank registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules, 1969 [hereinafter called the ‘Act and the Rules’], seeking direction to the 1 st respondent to appoint a Senior Officer of the Co-operative Department as Administrator of the 3 rd respondent Bank, and further to declare that the present administrative committee appointed by Ext.P6 is not entitled to continue in office as they have violated the norms for appointment and swindled huge amount. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are thus:
2. The election to the 3 rd respondent society was stayed by this Court as per Ext.P1 interim order in W.P.(C) No.21935 of 2015. When election was stayed by this Court, the Managing Committee then in office filed W.P.(C) No.22460 of 2015 to appoint them as administrative committee members under Sec.33(1) of the Act. This Court as per Ext.P2 order directed the Joint Registrar to explore the possibility of constituting an administrative committee consisting of the erstwhile managing committee members.
3. Accordingly, the Joint Registrar issued Ext.P3 order appointing three persons of the erstwhile Managing Committee members as the administrative committee. As per the said order, the term of the committee will be over on 04.02.2016. According to the petitioner, while in office, the present administrative committee acted against the interest of the Bank and regularized the services of certain employees who were working on consolidated pay, collecting huge amount. That apart, certain appointments to the post of Clerk were made who are not even qualified. In that circumstances, petitioner has filed Ext.P4 petition before the 1 st respondent.
4. It is also stated that, as the period of the administrative committee is over on elapse of one year in terms of Sec.33(1)(b) of the Act, they cannot continue in office. According to the petitioner, Article 243ZL of the Constitution prohibits continuance of the administrative committee in office exceeding six months. Sec.33(1A) provides that the term of the committee can be extended exceeding one year by the Government, in a notification published in the Gazette for reasons to be recorded, permitting the Registrar to extend the term of the said committee. Therefore, petitioner filed a petition before the 1 st respondent to appoint a Senior Officer of the Department as Administrator. While Ext.P4 was pending before the Joint Registrar, petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.3844 of 2016 before this Court to remove the present administrative committee members as they are acting against the interest of the Bank. As per Ext.P5 judgment, the said writ petition was disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 at the earliest.
5. Thereupon, according to the petitioner, 1 st respondent passed an order with a prior date extending the term of the administrative committee by an order dated 27.01.2016, evident from Ext.P6. In Ext.P6 order, 1 st respondent has not considered Ext.P4 objection filed by the petitioner. Thereupon, petitioner has filed Exts.P7 and P8 on 05.02.2016, highlighting his grievances. Thereafter he filed W.P.(C) No.6948 of 2016 seeking to declare that the administrative committee appointed by Ext.P6 is not entitled to continue in office and secured Ext.P9 judgment whereby 1 st respondent was directed to consider Exts.P7 and P8.