IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22764 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, KALLETTUMKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.141 KALLETTUMKARA-PO, TRICHUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT N.K.JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER, KALLETTUMKARA SERVICE CO-OPERTIVE BANK LTD.NO.141, KALLETTUMKARA-PO, TRICHUR DISTRICT, (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G), MUKUMDAPURAM, IRINJALAKUDA). 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, KALLETTUMKARA SERVICE CO-OPERTIVE BANK LTD.NO.141, KALLETTUMKARA-PO, TRICHUR DISTRICT, (THE UNIT INSPECTOR, KORATTY, O/O ASST.REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), MUKUMDAPURAM). 3. T.K.JOHNY, MEMBER, KALLETTUMKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.141 KALLETTUMKARA-PO, TRICHUR DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22764 OF 2009 (M) ===================== Dated this the 11th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The Manging Committee of Kallettumkara Service Co- operative Bank is the petitioner. In this writ petition, they challenge the removal of 592 members of the Bank from the final voters list. 2. Facts of the case are that by order issued by the Registrar under Section 32, Managing committee of the Bank was superseded. By Ext.P1 judgment rendered by this Court in WP(C) No.15973/09, that order was set aside. Thereafter, it is stated that a resolution was passed by the Committee for holding election. When that resolution was not acted upon, a writ petition was filed before this Court as WP(C) No.17945/09, which was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment directing that if the Managing Committee of the Society passes an appropriate resolution for conduct of the election and forward the same to the authorities, the same shall be acted upon. 3. Petitioner submits that subsequently resolution was passed for holding an election on 13th of August, 2009 and that WPC 22764/09 :2 : pursuant to the said resolution, Ext.P3 election notification was published scheduling the election to 13th of August, 2009. It is stated that as required under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, the Managing Committee prepared a voters list and the same was sent to the Electoral Officer. Later by Ext.P4, the President was called upon to explain why the 981 persons mentioned in Ext.P5 list, enclosed to Ext.P4, shall not be removed for the reason that complaints were received that they are from outside the area of operation of the society. Thereupon, Ext.P6 objection was filed, in which what the President has stated is that on this allegation, already proceedings have been initiated against 1643 members of the Bank and that in view of the pendency of such proceedings, further action as proposed in Ext.P4 shall not be taken. 4. The objection was considered and final voters list was published on 28/7/2009 from which 592 persons included in Ext.P5 list were removed. It is challenging the removal of the aforesaid 592 persons from the final voters list of the Bank, this writ petition is filed. 5. From the facts, therefore, it is evident that the WPC 22764/09 :3 : allegation on the basis of which removal has been ordered is that those who have been removed are residing outside the area of operation of the Bank and therefore are ineligible to be voters in the Bank. A reading of Ext.P6, the objection filed shows that even the President did not contradict the factual allegation made in Ext.P4 and if that be so, on the materials placed, I cannot find anything wrong with the proceedings of the Electoral Officer. Further, though final voters list was published on 28.7.2009, no member, who has been deprived of his voting right has challenged their exclusion from the final voters list. Therefore, I see no merit in this writ petition. 6. However, the right to vote being an individual right, it will be open to the persons who are affected by such removal to challenge their removal, if they are aggrieved by the said order to the Electoral Officer in appropriate proceedings and if any such proceedings are initiated, the same will be decided untramelled by what is stated in this judgment. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp