IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15341 of 2008(B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- K.P.VISWANATHAN, PRESIDENT, UNDER ORDER OF SUSPENSION, THRISSUR TALUK CO-OPERATIVE COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY LTD. NO.R-728 KALLINGAL LANE,THRISSUR 22 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE JACOB (JOSE) SRI.MEREENA JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THRISSUR. 2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THRISSUR. 3. THE THRISSUR TALUK CO-OP COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY LIMITED NO.R.728,KALLINGAL LANE, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.15341 of 2008-B = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT “CR” 1.Petitioner, an Advocate, challenges the decision that he is disqualified to be an A Class member of the third respondent society, which membership is open only to unemployed graduates and post graduates who are inclined to take up teaching as a profession and such members who are employed in the institutions run by the third respondent. He contends that though he is on the rolls of the Bar Council of Kerala, he is not even a subscriber to the Kerala Advocates' Welfare Fund and is not practising and earning any income as an Advocate. WP(C)15341/2008 -: 2 :- 2.Clause 5 of the Bye-laws of the society reads as follows: “5. Membership - A Class membership is opened to only unemployed Graduates and Post- Graduates who are inclined to take up teaching as a profession and also such members who are employed in the institutions run by the Thrissur Taluk Co-operative College Educational Society.....”. (emphasis supplied) 3.The emphasis is on unemployment. The aim of such a society is the benefit of unemployed persons who satisfy the other conditions also. An Advocate cannot be treated as an unemployed person. It makes no difference whether he is a person earning from his avocation as an Advocate. The impugned order cannot, therefore, be found fault with. WP(C)15341/2008 -: 3 :- The writ petition fails. The same is dismissed in limine. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/230508