IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2011 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 7959 of 2007(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.R.NAGAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., A.R.NAGAR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, V.K.HARIKUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIROORANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE HEAD MASTER, G.U.P. SCHOOL, KARINGAPPARA, THIROORANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. E.ABDU SALAM, S/O. E.BEERANKUTTY, P.D.TEACHER, G.U.P.SCHOOL, KARINGAPPARA, THIROORANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.MAYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 7959/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE REQUISITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 9.11.2004 EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE REGISTERED LAWYER NOTICE DATED 14.12.2005 ISSUED TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE PAY CERTIFICATE AND AGREEMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM PAY ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2022. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE vps P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 7959 OF 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a co-operative society, has filed this writ petition for an order directing the second respondent to deduct from the salary of the third respondent the monthly repayment instalments and to pay it over to the petitioner society. It is contended that section 37 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) obligates the second respondent to effect recovery from the salary of the 3rd respondent. A division bench of this court has in Changamanad Service Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Mohanan (2009 (3) KLT 623) held that a co- operative society cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this court to direct the Controlling Officer to take step against surety under section 37(2) of the Act from the salary of the surety. It was held that for recovery of the amount, the remedy provided under section 69 of the Act should be resorted to. In the light of the binding decision of this Court, the relief prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner society to proceed against the third respondent to recover the amounts due from her by instituting other appropriate proceedings. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No./2011 2