IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10382 of 2008(J) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, TIRUR CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND DEVELOPMENT TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT IN CHARGE V.SOUDAMINI. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIEITES ( G) MALAPPURAM 2. P.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN, UNIT INSPECTOR OFFICE OF THE ASST.REGISTRARA ( G) TIRUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.10382 of 2008-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader. 2. Petitioner challenges Ext.P4 dated 22-1-2007 by which one officer Sri.P.K.Purushothaman has been appointed to conduct an enquiry in terms of Section 65 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Though different grounds are raised, including the contention that there was an earlier enquiry which could not unearth anything against the society, I am satisfied that the competent authority would give the petitioner an opportunity of pre- decisional hearing on any ground which emerges on conclusion of the enquiry on the basis of Ext.P4. This is all the more so because, WP(C)10382/2008 -: 2 :- though Ext.P4 requires the officer to conclude the enquiry within a period of three months and Section 65(5) prescribes a period of six months for completion of enquiry, the enquiry has not been completed, though more than one year and two months have gone through. Therefore, even if the enquiry, ultimately, comes out with any material against the petitioner, no action should immediately follow on the basis of the provisions of the KCS Act and the petitioner will be given adequate opportunity of pre-decisional hearing serving on the petitioner a copy of the enquiry report, if it contains anything against the interest of the committee in office, in accordance with law. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/070408