IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3670 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. M.A.SHAJAHAN, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, KECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KECHERY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 2. SHERIFA HAMZA, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, KECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KECHERY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 3. A.A.ABBAS, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, KECHERY, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KECHERY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 4. M.A.SUBAIR, MEMBER BOARD OF DIRECTORS, KECHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KECHERY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENT: ---------------- JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), TRICHUR. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.3670 of 2008-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 31st day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners challenge Ext.P1 notice issued on 18-1-2008 calling upon them to show cause against disqualification from the committee of a co- operative bank. The only allegation therein is that they are defaulters to the society. Exts.P6 to P9 show that the society has certified that they are not defaulters as on the date of issuance of Ext.P1. The petitioners contend that Ext.P1 has been issued even without appropriate information and material being gathered from the society. On such basis, it is contended that the action proposed under Ext.P1 is one intended to abuse the law to create lack of quorum. Having heard the learned counsel for parties and WP(C)3670/2008 -: 2 :- being satisfied that the apprehensions of the petitioners cannot be rejected as baseless, this writ petition is disposed of directing that objections to Ext.P1 shall be considered after giving adequate opportunity of hearing and a decision shall be rendered by stating reasons. In the light of the nature of the contents of Ext.P1 qua Exts.P6 to P9, I am also satisfied that the petitioners are entitled to an order that any decision on Ext.P1, if it is adverse to their interest, shall not be enforced for a period of two weeks from the date of its communication to the petitioners. Hence, it is so ordered. It is clarified that this judgment does not touch on the merits of the writ petition. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/