IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2009 / 2ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 11225 of 2009(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.M.MATHEW,KALATHIL, NEELAMPEROOR P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. K.HARIDAS, EZHAMPOKKAL, NEELAMPEROOR P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. JOJO GEORGE,PATTARKALAM, ERA P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY MR.P.RAVINDRAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV.MR.HARIKRISHNAN RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE UNIT INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KAVALAM, KUTTANAD, ALAPPUZHA. 3. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. W.P.(C). NO.11225/2009-W: *ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED: 4. G. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O. GOPALA PILLAI, AGED 54 YEARS, MALECKAL, ERA.P.O., ALAPPUZHA. *IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD. 29/05/2009 IN I.A. NO. 6032/2009. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. MOHAMMED HASHIM, ADDL. R4 BY ADV.MR.P.B.SURESH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.11225/2009-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR, ALAPPUZHA DTD. 14/11/07. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE R.3. BANK. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR DTD. 03/06/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD 28/06/2008. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DTD. 03/07/08 IN W.P.(C). NO. 20071/08. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SUPERCESSION PASSED BY THE R.1. DTD. 13/01/09. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 17/02/2009 IN W.P.(C).NO.20071/08. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 20/02/09. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DT. 20/02/09. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.6785/08. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DTD. 12/03/2009. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R.1. DTD. 02/04/09. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT ON THE POSTAL COVER DTD. 02/04/2009 (FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH COUNTER TO I.A. NO. 5140/2009 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT). EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DTD. 31/03/2009. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 29/05/2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE RELEVANT ENTRIES IN THE MINUTES BOOK. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.11225 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are the elected members to the Board of Directors of Neelampeeroor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. 2. While they were in the Office, they were issued Ext.P3 show cause notice proposing to supersede the Committee and that was challenged before this Court in WP(C) No.20071/2008, in which Ext.P5 interim orders enabling continuance of the proceedings in pursuance to Ext.P3 was passed. But, however, it was directed that the same shall not be implemented. In the meanwhile, proceedings continued and Ext.P6 order of supersession was passed. Subsequently, that writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P7 judgment directing that the order be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks in order to enable the petitioners therein to seek further remedies available. 3. It is stated that accordingly, Ext.P8 appeal and Ext.P9 stay petition were filed before the 3rd respondent. Again a writ petition was filed before this Court as WP(C) No.6785/2009 WP(C) No.11225/2009 -2- resulting in Ext.P10 judgment directing consideration of Ext.P9 stay petition filed along with Ext.P8 appeal. It was also directed that till a decision is taken on Ext.P9, Ext.P6 shall not be implemented. According to the petitioners, in pursuance to Ext.P10 judgment, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P11 hearing notice and at that stage, the 1st respondent issued Ext.P12 order directing implementation of Ext.P6 order. That order was again called in question before this Court in this writ petition. 4. At the time of admission, this Court passed interim order dated 03/04/2009 directing that Ext.P6 & P12 referred to above be kept in abeyance. It is stated that aggrieved by the aforesaid interim order, the respondents herein filed an appeal as W.A.No.937/2009, which was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 23/05/2009, and the position is continuing as such. 5. Meanwhile, the Government passed Ext.P14 order dated 31/03/2009 rejecting Ext.P9 stay petition and the learned Government Pleader submits that Administrator took charge of the Society on 02/04/2009, which according to him is one day prior to the interim order passed by this Court. It is also informed that the WP(C) No.11225/2009 -3- 3rd respondent has already scheduled a hearing of Ext.P8 appeal on 04/07/2009. When the writ petition is taken up today for hearing, the prayer made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners is to require the 3rd respondent to dispose of Ext.P8 appeal, which is already posted on 04/07/2009, and that in the meanwhile to maintain the interim order passed by this Court on 03/04/2009. 6. However, the prayer made by the petitioners for continuation of the interim order is opposed by the learned Government Pleader and also the learned counsel appearing for the additional 4th respondent, mainly contending that before the said order was passed, the Administrator had taken charge. 7. As already noticed, this Court passed an order of stay on 03/04/2009. Aggrieved by that order, the respondents in the writ petition filed W.A.No.937/2009, where one of the contentions raised was that the Administrator had taken charge. Despite the contention so urged, the Division Bench after considering the issue in detail, ultimately dismissed the writ appeal by judgment dated 23/05/2009. If that be so, the stay order passed by this Court on 03/04/2009 remains in force. Consequently, I cannot ignore either the interim order passed or the judgment dismissing the writ appeal WP(C) No.11225/2009 -4- passed by the Division Bench accepting the submission now made by the learned Government Pleader. 8. Taking into account the above, and also considering the fact that Ext.P8 appeal itself is posted on 04/07/2009, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- That the 3rd respondent shall dispose of Ext.P8 appeal filed by the petitioners against Ext.P6 order of supersession, after hearing all the parties, and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in case the final order to be passed on Ext.P8 appeal is adverse to the petitioners, the same shall be kept in abeyance for a period of four days from the date of service of the order on the petitioners herein. It is directed that until the aforesaid process is completed, the interim order dated 03/04/2009 will remain in force. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg