IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 24TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25985 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.S. KOCHUKUTTAN, PRESIDENT, VILAYAN, CHATHANNOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, VILAYANNOOR P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR SRI.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR SMT.SANDHYA RADHAKRISHNAN SMT.M.SRUTHY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETAR TO GOVT. GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCITIES (G), PALAKKAD. 4. JUNIOR INSPECTOR/UNIT INSPECTOR, KUZHALMANNAM, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (G), ALATHUR, PALAKKAD. 5. S.JAYENDRANATHAN, S/O. SIVARAMAN, PULAKKAD, VILAYAN, CHATHANNOOR, THENKURISSI, PALAKKAD. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 25985 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 15th September, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the President of the Vilayan Chathannoor Service Co-operative Bank. He is aggrieved by Ext. P2 order dated 5-8-2009 directing an enquiry by the 4th respondent under Section 68(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act based on Ext. P1 report in an enquiry under Section 65 of the Act. The contention of the petitioner is that even assuming that the findings in Ext. P1 are correct, that would not give jurisdiction to the 3rd respondent to order an enquiry under Section 68(1) of the Act. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. I am of opinion that the petitioner can raise all these contentions before the enquiry officer in the enquiry to be conducted pursuant to Ext. P2. But while conducting the enquiry, the 4th respondent shall, as contemplated by law, give the petitioner all opportunities for defending himself in the enquiry and in the enquiry report, the 4th respondent shall enter specific findings in respect of each and every contention raised by the petitioner in the enquiry. When the 3rd respondent considers the enquiry report, he shall consider the question as to whether the findings in Ext. P1, even assuming that they are true, is sufficient to order an enquiry under Section 68(1). The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.