IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 27460 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT MULTI PURPOSE CO-0PERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.D 1883, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. T.BALASUBRAMANIAM, PULIKKODE HOUSE, VELLALASSERY, KOZHIKODE-673601. 2. THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT, KOZHIKODE-673601, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR (FINANCE), NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT, KOZHIKODE-673601. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.K.R.RANJITH R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27460 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a co-operative society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The first respondent herein, an employee of the second respondent, had availed a loan from the petitioner society. The loan was to be repaid in instalments. Under the terms fo the agreement between the parties, the second respondent was bound to deduct the monthly instalments from the salary of the first respondent and to pay it over to the petitioner. It appears though such recovery was effected initially, later, even after recovery from the first respondent, payment was not made over to the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to release the amounts due to the petitioner. 2. During the course of the arguments, it was brought to my notice, that though initially the second respondent had withheld certain payments to the first respondent for the purpose of paying it over to the petitioner, later the money withheld was paid to the first respondent and was not paid over to the petitioner. In my opinion, the first respondent being a member of the petitioner society, if any W.P.(C) No.27460 of 2010 2 amount is due from the first respondent to the petitioner society, the remedy of the petitioner society is to initiate appropriate proceedings under section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act before the Arbitrator. This is all more so in view of the fact that that the first respondent has ceased to be an employee of the second respondent. I, therefore, find no grounds to grant the reliefs prayed for in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed leaving open the contentions of both sides and reserving liberty with the petitioner to institute proceedings under section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act before the Arbitrator for recovery of the amounts allegedly due from the first respondent. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.