IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 WA.No. 685 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.19455/2008 Dated 09/01/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- R.SANAL KUMAR, ASST.SECRETARY, KCA & HON.SEC.ALLEPPEY, GEETHANJALI, PAZHAVEEDU P.O., ALLEPPEY-688 009. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, C.A.COMPLEX, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY MR.T.C.MATHEW. 2. MR.T.R.BALAKRISHNAN, PRESIDENT, KCA, ADVOCATE, SULTHAN BATHERY-673 592. 3. MR.T.C.MATHEW, HONORARY SECRETARY, KCA, KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, 25A, NOOPURAM, MUTTADA P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 4. SRI.A.SALIM, HONY. TREASURER, KCA, RUBY ROLLER & FLOUR MILLS LTD., 579, CUTCHERY WARD, KOLLAM-691 013. 5. MANOJ, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AJITH BHAVAN, PAZHAVEEDU P.O., ALAPUZHA. ADV. SRI.A.V.THOMAS FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JJ ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.685 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September,2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph.J Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers :- a. “Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction commanding the first respondent to continue permitting the petitioner to attend all meetings of the first respondent association as well as central council meetings of the first respondent in his capacity as the Assistant Secretary of the first respondent association as well as the secretary of the Alappuzha Cricket Association. b. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction commanding the first respondent to strictly follow the procedures laid down in the Bye law of the first respondent association with regard to the functioning of the association. 2. The writ petition was dismissed relegating the petitioner to pursue the ordinary remedy. In other words, the W.A.No.685 of 2009 2 learned Single Judge has taken the view that the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be exercised in respect of the reliefs claimed in the writ petition. It was also held by the Learned Single Judge that interference is possible only if the respondents act in violation of the statutory right of any of the citizens.It is not in dispute that the question is only academic as of now. Therefore it will be sufficient if the said question regarding maintainability is left open. However to the extent the learned Single Judge has laid down the question regarding maintainability, the judgment is clarified and modified making it clear that the maintainability of the writ petition will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case and the question of the law involved therein. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE ssn W.A.No.685 of 2009 3