IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16107 of 2008(P) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- G.PRADEEPKUMAR, S/O.GOPALAN, PANAKAVU KALAM HOUSE, PAYYALORE, KOLLENGODE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE KOLLENGODE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD NO.F.1201, KOLLENGODE-678506, PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), PALAKKAD. 3. THE RETURNING OFFICER/OFFICE INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, CHITTUR CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. R2 AND R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.16107 of 2008-P = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 30th day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.Petitioner's nomination for an election to a co- operative society has been rejected. The ground of rejection is that though the petitioner holds the required number of shares, he had not paid up the balance of the share value in terms of the amendment by which the value of each share was enhanced to Rs.100/-. That amendment was some time in 2006. 2.The petitioner faced with the rejection of his nomination, takes the stand that the amendment of the bye-laws in 2006 enhancing the share value was without following the due procedure prescribed by the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules in as much as no notice, as WP(C)16107/2008 -: 2 :- contemplated by Section 11(2) of the Act, was issued before such amendment. 3.The electoral process having commenced in 2008, it is neither advisable nor reasonable to interdict the electoral process on a ground referable to a plea of illegal, irregular and improper amendment of bye-laws which was made in 2006. Therefore, while not stamping the amendment with the approval of this Court, this writ petition is dismissed without interfering with the refusal to accept the nomination of the petitioner. This judgment also shall not prejudice the right of the petitioner to challenge the rejection of nomination or for such other reliefs in relation to election in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/030608