IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 16158 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.V.KANDAMUTHAN, MANALIKKAD VEEDU, CHERAMANGALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY SRI. A.V. RAVI SRI. BIJU SUKUMARAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KREALA, REPRESNTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, ANIMAL HUSBANDARY & DAIRY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DAIRY DEVELOPMENT, O/O.THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF DAIRY DEVELOPMENT, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD - 678001. 3. CHERAMANGALAM KSHEERA VYVASAYA SAHAKARANA SANGAM LTD., NO.P-12(D) CHERAMANGALAM P.O., PIN-678703, PALAKKAD DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. * ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED * ADDL.R4: MUHAMMAD HANEEFA, S/O.UMMAR ALI RAWATHER, AGED 56 YEARS, MELEPADAMKALAM, CHEENIKODE THERUV, MELARADE P.O., ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. * ADDLR4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18/6/2010 IN I.A.NO. 7594/2010. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI R3 BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) ADDL.R4 BY ADV SRI.P.DEEPAK SRI. JOHNSON P. JOHN SRI. BABY MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C) NO. 16158/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO.E 4867/2009 DATED 11/3/2010 P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18/12/2009. P2(A) COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26/12/2009. P3 COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 1/1/2010. P4 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.G1/1116/2010 DATED 20/01/2010. P5 COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 28/3/2010. P6 COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 28/3/2010. P7 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/4/2010 IN WP(C) NO. 13953/2010. P8 COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.E 4857/2009 DATED 18/05/2010. P9 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P9(A) COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER. P10 COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO.15119/D2/2010/AD DATED 04/08/2010. P11 COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ON 19/08/2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(A) COPY OF THE RESIGNATION LETTER DATED 17/05/2010. R4(B) COPY OF THE RESIGNATION LETTER DATED 25/05/2010. R4(C) COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 27/05/2010. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). Nos.16158 & 33046 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT These Writ Petitions pertain to the same subject matter inasmuch as they relate to the disqualification of the petitioner in W.P.(C).No. 16158/2010, in terms of Rule 44 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules (for short 'the Rules'). W.P.(C).No.16158/2010 is filed challenging Ext.P8 order and, inter alia, with a further prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to function as a member of the Board of Directors of the third respondent- society. Ext.P8 is an order of the second respondent therein disqualifying the petitioner and two other members of the Board of Directors of the Cheramangalam Ksheera Vyavasaya Sahakarana Sangam Ltd., No.P-12(D) (for short 'the society'), from continuing as members of its Board of Directors. Admittedly, against Ext.P8 oder of disqualification, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P9 appeal before the first respondent. Ext.P9 (a) is the stay petition filed along with the said appeal. It is apprehending coercive action during the pendency of the said appeal that this Writ Petition has been filed. W.P.(C) Nos.16158 & 33046 of 2010 2 2. On 26.5.2010, this Court admitted the said Writ Petition and granted an interim stay of operation and implementation of Ext.P8 order till the disposal of Ext.P9(a) petition filed by the petitioner in Ext.P9 appeal. Thereafter, the first respondent therein issued Ext.P10 notice dated 4.8.2010 to the petitioner requiring him to attend a hearing scheduled to be held on 10.8.2010. The Additional Chief Secretary, Agriculture (Dairy Department) heard the appeal for sometime and thereafter issued Ext.P11 order. As per Ext.P11, the Director, Dairy Development Department was directed to conduct a detailed enquiry and to submit a report. Pursuant to Ext.P11, The Joint Director, Dairy Development Department conducted an enquiry on 26.8.2010 and submitted a report before the first respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that copy of the said report was not so far been furnished to him. The apprehension of the petitioner is that decision, if any, taken in Ext.P9 appeal, without offering him an opportunity to furnish his explanation based on the said report would detrimentally affect his prospects in the said appeal. Taking note of the attendant circumstances, this Court passed another interim order on 9.9.2010. As per the said interim order, the first respondent was directed not to pass an order on Ext.P9 appeal without affording the petitioner an opportunity to peruse the report submitted by the Joint Director, Dairy W.P.(C) Nos.16158 & 33046 of 2010 3 Development Department pursuant to the enquiry held on 26.8.2010 and affording him an opportunity to offer his explanation thereon. Admittedly, copy of the said report is yet to be served on the petitioner. 3. W.P.(C).No.33046/2010 has been filed by a member of the society on being aggrieved by the delay in the matter of disposal of the appeal filed by the fourth respondent viz., Ext.P9 in W.P.(C). No.16158/2010. According to the petitioner herein, after the issuance of interim order dated 26.8.2010 in the former Writ Petition, the respondents are not taking any step to furnish copy of the report sought for by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.16158/2010 and then, to expedite the hearing on Ext.P9 appeal therein. 4. In view of the order I propose to pass in these Writ Petitions I do not think it necessary to consider the rival contentions on merits, at this stage. Evidently, Ext.P9 appeal in W.P.(C).NO.16158/2010 is pending before the Government. By virtue of the interim order dated 9.9.2010, the Government could dispose of Ext.P9 appeal after furnishing the copy of the enquiry report referred above to the petitioner in W.P.(C). No.16158/2010 and affording him an opportunity to offer his explanation thereon. In the said circumstances, there will be a direction to the first respondent to furnish a copy of the report submitted by the Joint Director, W.P.(C) Nos.16158 & 33046 of 2010 4 Dairy Development Department based on the enquiry held on 26.8.2010 to the petitioner in the former Writ Petition and to afford him an opportunity to offer his explanation thereon. After affording him an opportunity as directed above, the first respondent in W.P.(C).NO.16158/2020 shall proceed to consider Ext.P9 appeal therein and orders shall be passed thereon in accordance with law, after affording opportunity to all the parties concerned. This shall be done expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ext.P8 order shall not be implemented till a final decision is taken on Ext.P9 appeal in W.P.(C).No. 16158/2010. As already noticed, the latter Writ Petition has been filed essentially, for the purpose of an expedite disposal of the aforesaid appeal viz., Ext.P9 appeal in W.P.(C).No. 16158/2010. Hence, in the light of the above directions, no separate orders are called for in W.P.(C).No.33046/2010. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) Nos.16158 & 33046 of 2010 5 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) Nos.16158 & 33046 of 2010 6