IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 33825 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- POOCHACKAL MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.A-170(D) APCOS, PANAVALLY P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE POST MASTER GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, OFFICE OF THE POST MASTER GENERAL, CENTRAL REGION, KOCHI-682 018. 3. THE SUB POST MASTER POOCHACKAL, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-686 526. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 33825 of 2009 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 18.12.90 EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(b)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(c)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(d)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(e)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(f)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P2(g)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.01 EXT.P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 29.6.09 EXT.P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 29.6.09 EXT.P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DATED 10.7.09 (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).33825/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. Petitioner is a Milk Producers Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. 2. Ext.P1 is a circular issued by the Deputy Director of Dairy Development directing deposit of reserve fund. This order further directs that while depositing reserve fund as above, preference will be given to National Savings Scheme, Indira Vikas Pathra and such other similar Schemes. 3. In compliance with Ext.P1, on 4.1.2001, petitioner made a deposit of Rs.39,000/- by purchasing Kissan Vikas Pathra. The maturity period was 5½ years and the deposit was renewed by one more year and was repayable on 4.7.2007 with the maturity value of double the amount deposited viz., Rs.78,000/-. 4. On the deposit becoming mature, petitioner applied for release of the deposited amount. Thereupon they were issued W.P.(C).33825/10 2 Ext.P5 letter stating that the request has been forwarded to the 2nd respondent. Since there was no reply from any of the respondents, the writ petition was filed praying for a direction to the respondents to disburse Rs.78,000/- due to the petitioner, along with interest at 9%. 5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions submits that in terms of amended Rule 6, of the Kissan Vikas Pathra Rules, deposit could have been accepted only from the individuals and Trusts and not from Co-operative Societies like the petitioner. It is stated that it was in view of this, they found it difficult to refund the amount as claimed by the petitioner. 6. In my view, the stand taken by the respondents is totally unreasonable. The fact that the petitioner had deposited Rs.39,000/- in Kissan Vikas Pathra is not in dispute. It is also not disputed that the deposit matured on 4.7.2007. Respondents have no case that in terms of the deposit, the amount payable was not Rs.78,000/- as claimed by the petitioner. In view of the admitted facts as stated above, W.P.(C).33825/10 3 petitioner is entitled to refund of the amount in terms of the agreement between the parties. Even if there was a mistake as contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, it was upto the respondents to rectify such mistakes by notifying the petitioner of the mistakes committed and by refunding the amount that was accepted in deposit, within a reasonable time. Nothing of this sort has been done either before the expiry of the period of the deposit or even thereafter. 7. In such circumstances, I cannot accept the plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner and in my view, the petitioner should be eligible for refund of Rs.78,000/- together with interest as stated above. 8. However, a Division Bench of this Court in Thrissur Taluk Chethu Thozhilali Multipurpose Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Sub Post Master (2005 (1) KLT 918), while dealing with an identical case filed by a Society, has held that the Society is eligible for the deposited amount with 9% interest thereof. W.P.(C).33825/10 4 9. Since this Court is bound by the above Division Bench judgment, I direct the respondents to refund Rs.39,000/- deposited by the petitioner along with 9% interest from 4.1.2001 till the date of payment. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs