IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2009 / 26TH POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 2015 of 2006() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14686/2006 Dated 06/07/2006 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5: ---------------------------------- 1. THE PRESIDENT, TANALUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.M2 P.O. K.PURAM, MALAPPURAM. 2. TANALUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.M2, P.O. K.PURAM, MALAPPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR SRI.V.G.ARUN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2 & 6: ------------------------------------------------ 1. VELIYATH ABU RAZAK, VELIYATH HOUSE, THANALOOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT., TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MALAPPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2 TO 4 SMT.A.G.ANEETHA SRI.M.AJAY, SC, STATE INFORMATION COMMN FOR R.3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J -------------------------------- W.A.2015/2006 ----------------------------- Dated this 16th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy (Ag.C.J.) Writ petitioner applied for copies of certain documents from the appellant Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative societies Act. All documents were given as requested by the petitioner, except the Board resolutions, stating that it contains trade secrets. Learned Judge by the impugned judgment, directed that the documents to be given to the petitioner. The appeal is filed contending that the Co-operative Society is not a public authority and not covered under the Act and it is also further stated that documents required are protected documents, in view of the trade secrets. We are of the view that the petitioner ought to have approached the second respondent instead of this Court. He also wants further documents as the second respondent is the appellate authority. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he may approach the second respondent for the relief and W.A.2015/2006 2 the same shall be considered by the second respondent untrammelled by the observations in the impugned judgment. Impugned judgment is set aside. Appeal is disposed of as above. J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice V.GIRI, Judge mrcs