IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 30096 of 2006(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.K. PANKAJAKSHAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, UDAYAMPARAMBIL, CHEMPUPARAMBU P.O., VIA. CHAMPAKULAM, DISTRICT ALAPPUZHA (EX.MANAGING DIRECTOR, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL LIMITED NO.A-816, AHARA BUILDING, ALLEPPEY-1. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ALAPPUZHA. 2. PART TIME ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ALLEPPEY CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL NO.A-816, AHARA BUILDING, ALAPPUZHA, OFFICE INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, AMBALAPUZHA. 3. ALLEPPEY DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL LTD.NO.A-816, AHARA BUILDING, ALLEPPEY-1, REPRESENTED BY ITS PART TIME ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE INSPECTOR,OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, AMBALAPUZHA. BY SPL.GOVT.PLEADER SMT. A.G. ANEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 30096/2006 G APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NOS. V,VI, VII & VIII TAKEN AT THE ANNUAL GENERAL BODY MEETING HELD ON 16/4/2006. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 11/09/2006 STAYING THE RESOLUTION NO. 1 DT. 30/07/06 OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE ISSUED BY THE R1. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DT. 13/09/2006 WAS ISSUED BY THE R1. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 30/09/2006 REQUESTING TO REVOKE EXT.P2 STAY ORDER. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED TO EXT.P3 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 5/10/2006 BY THE R1 SUPERCEDING THE MANAGING COMMITTEE. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM DT. 07/10/2006 PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM DT. 12/09/2006 PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS EXT.R1A. COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE HELD ON 23/4/2006. EXT.R1B. COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE HELD ON 30/07/2006. EXT.R1C. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRLRP NO. 85/2006 AND 86/2006. True copy tga Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. ================================== W.P.(C)No.30096 of 2006 ================================== Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT Petitioner is the President of the Committee which was in office in the Alleppey District Co- operative Hospital Limited while it was superseded as per the impugned order. 2. With the passage of time, the period of that elected committee is over and the period of any disqualification that the petitioner would have incurred on account of the impugned order has also run out. But the fact remains that the supersession was referable to only one ground and it is appropriate that the same is examined. 3. The general body of the society resolved to sell an item of property. This is the effect of Ext.P1 resolution. That was not given effect to. WPC30096/2006 -:2:- In fact, that decision was rescinded by the Registrar in exercise of power under Rule 176 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”. On the allegation that such action would fall within Rule 54(2) of those rules, the impugned supersession has been passed. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the prohibition under Rule 54 (2) is only as against the disposal of any immovable property without the prior sanction of the general body and of the Registrar and that Ext.P1 is only a decision of the general body and even that is explicit, to the effect that any disposal of the property in terms of Ext.P1 would be effected only with the prior sanction of the Registrar. It is accordingly contended that the impugned action is groundless. WPC30096/2006 -:3:- 5. Learned special Government Pleader for Co- operation pointed out that, but for the interference of the Registrar in exercise of authority under Rule 176 of the Rules, Ext.P1 would have been given effect to. 6. Rule 54(2) of the Rules reads as follows: “(2) No society shall dispose of any immovable property acquired by the society without the prior sanction of the general body and of the Registrar: Provided that Housing Societies, the bye-laws of which specifically provide for the purchase and sale of immovable property, may dispose of those property without the sanction of the Registrar or of the general body.” WPC30096/2006 -:4:- 7. A plain reading of Rule 54(2) of the Rules would show that the prohibition imposed on the society is to the effect that it shall not dispose of any immovable property acquired by it without the prior sanction of the general body and of the Registrar. This does not mean that the committee and the general body of the society cannot deliberate on the question whether any immovable property belonging to the society has to be disposed of. Such decision making process, at the level of the society, has necessarily to precede any requirement of sanction by the Registrar. The general body has to consider the question whether any property has to be disposed of. Even if the committee of the society has a proposal to do so, it has to first obtain the approval of the general body. Even if the approval of the general body is to be given effect to, prior sanction is required. Therefore, the disqualification of infraction of WPC30096/2006 -:5:- Rule 54(2) of the Rules would arise only when a society has disposed of immovable property without the prior sanction of the general body and the Registrar. In this view of the matter, the impugned action is illegal and contrary to the rules. In the result, the decision contained in Ext.P6 is quashed. This writ petition is allowed as above. It is declared that the committee headed by the petitioner, which was superseded, is entitled to continue in office during the remaining period of its term. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. sl.