IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 67 of 2009(S) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.33868/2008 Dated 03/12/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. M.SANTHOSH,ASWATHI, MUTTAPPALAM P.O., SREENIVASAPURAM, VARKALA. 2. BLLATHA, G.S. LAND, PARAYALAGIRI, THOKKODU P.O., VADASSERIKONAM, VARKALA. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- RATNAKARAN, AGED 52 YEARS, (FATHER'S NOT KNOWN), JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP SOCIETIES (G), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM FOR R1 THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER STATES THAT THE CONTEMPT CASE MAYBE CLOSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO HIS ENTITLEMENT TO APPLY FOR REOPENING OF THE MATTER, IF NEEDED, HAVING REGARD TO THE INTERVENING CIRCUMSTANCES AND PENDENCY OF DIFFERENT OTHER MATTERS BEFORE DIFFERENT AUTHORITIES INCLUDING THIS COURT. CONTEMPT CASE IS CLOSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 14.8.2009 THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE //true copy// PA TO JUDGE lgk THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... CONT.CASE.NO. 67 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2009 ORDER The respondent is a Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. His said empowerment is in terms of Section 3(2) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The Co-operative Society which was the first respondent, in WP(C) 33868 of 2008 made certain appointments in its service. Those appointments were found to be illegal. The competent authority directed the committee of the society to remove those persons from service and also to recover amounts paid to them. That decision was challenged before this court by the appointed persons. They were relegated to the competent authority. The Government considered the appeal of the society and rejected the application for stay of enforcement of the decision impugned in that appeal. Nevertheless, the appointees continued to officiate. Petitioners, who are the members of that society, moved this court. It was noted that the government having rejected the stay petition, there was no reason for the continued disobedience of the Coc 67/09 2 directions contained in Ext.P9. At that juncture, it was submitted on behalf of the Joint Registrar that action would be taken in the wake of non-compliance of Ext.P9. It was so directed as per the judgment dated 3.12.2008. No action followed. The appointees continued to officiate. This is on the teeth of the fact that order of the government rejecting the application for stay continues to hold the feet. Petitioners have therefore filed this contempt case. 2. This contempt case is against an officer who is in the gazetted rank in the service of the State Government, exercising the powers of Registrar of Co-operative Societies under the Kerala Co-operative Service Act which carries great responsibilities and duties, if one were to act in any manner befitting the office he holds. 3. The respondent filed an affidavit in answer to this case by stating that the appeal is still pending before the government and nothing has been done. Obviously, he had not even understood the contents of the judgment dated 3.12.2008. 4. After perusing the aforesaid affidavit, this court minuted order dated 20.2.2009 holding that there is a strong prima facie case for imposition of very heavy costs and also for action under Coc 67/09 3 the Contempt of Courts Act. The respondent was given an opportunity to file a better affidavit to purge himself of the contempt and save himself from the consequences of his conduct, which was noticed as not mere administrative indiscipline but trying to overreach the decision of this court, delivered on 3.12.2008. More than three months have gone through and nothing worthwhile appears to have been done. The respondent has filed yet another affidavit taking the stand that he has issued a notice for supersession of the committee under Section 32(1) and that the appeal before the government is still pending. It is shown that in spite of Ext.R1(a) further direction on 20.2.2009 by him, the respondent could not obtain obedience of his directions, by the committee. On 2.3.2009, the respondent has issued notice under Section 32(1). 5. It is not as if that this court is not aware of the fact that in different situations different officers exercising powers of the Registrar have acted promptly or even over-enthusiastically in exercising powers under Section 32. While this court is not to suggest any action under Section 32, the case in hand discloses that the respondent is incompetent to hold the office of the Joint Coc 67/09 4 Registrar since he has demonstrated that he is incapable of enforcing the authority of his office through lawful measures. 6. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Principal Secretary to the Government in the Department of Co-operation, is directed to file affidavit as to the views of the Government of the continued retention of the respondent in service and as to why, he shall not be placed under suspension followed by disciplinary action for dereliction of duties and responsibilities attendant to his office in the light of what is stated above. The Principal Secretary in the Department will place such affidavit on record within a period of four weeks from now. Post on 3rd July, 2009. Hand over copy to learned Government Pleader. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/30.5