IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14605 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE KATTAPPANA SERVICE CO-OP SOCIETY BANK LTD., NO. 3738, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KATTAPPANA, P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KERALA, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, STATUE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), IDUKKI, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PAINAVU P.O., IDUKKI DIST. 3. THE ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), UDUMBANCHOLA, OFFICE OF THE ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES, UDUMBANCHOLA P.O., IDUKKI DIST. MR.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.14605 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of May, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a Co-operative Bank, submits that it wants to construct a building at a place called Puliyanmala in Idukki District for the purpose of expanding its business activities. It is stated that for this purpose, the petitioner has entered into Ext.P1 agreement with the Cardamom Growers Association, wherein, they are permitted to construct a building in the land belonging to the said Association. Subsequently, the Bank passed Ext.P2 resolution for this purpose, subject to the sanction of the 2nd respondent. It is stated that thereupon, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 to the 2nd respondent seeking prior sanction. 2. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent forwarded the matter to the 1st respondent, who in turn directed the 2nd respondent to take a final decision in the matter. Now the matter is pending before the 2nd respondent, and complaining of delay on the part of the 2nd respondent in deciding on Ext.P3, as WP(C) No.14605/2009 -2- required under Rule 54 of the Co-operative Societies Rules, the writ petition has been filed. 3. If as stated by the petitioner, Ext.P3 has been received and is pending before the 2nd respondent, he is bound to take a final decision in the matter. 4. Taking into account the complaint of the petitioner regarding the delay on the part of the 2nd respondent, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 and pass orders in accordance with law. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg