IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 W.A.No.388 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).No.19744/2007 DATED 05/12/2007 .................... APPELLANTS: PETITIONERS:- -------------------------------------------- 1. THE ANICADU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.A-113, NOOROMMAVU P.O., ANICADU, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. THE ANICADU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.A-113, NOOROMMAVU P.O., ANICADU, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.T.S.JOHN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS:- ------------------------ 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PATHANAMTHITTA-689589. 2. VARGHESE GEORGE, VELLANINGATTU, PUNNAVELI P.O., MALLAPPALLY. R1 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.A.G.ANEETHA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.Dattu,C.J. & K.M.Joseph,J. ----------------------------------------------- W.A.No.388 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. The appellants before us are the President and the Secretary respectively of a registered Co-operative Society, registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (“Act” for short). The Society had called in question Exhibit P12 order dated 5.6.2007 passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. By the said order, the Joint Registrar had directed the appellant-Society not to make further appointments, since the Society is suffering from huge financial loss. (2) The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition holding that, if for any reason the appellant-Society is aggrieved by the orders passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, they have a right of appeal/revision under the Act itself. In view of that, the learned Single Judge has declined to entertain the writ petition. (3) Admittedly what is questioned in the writ petition is an order passed by the Joint Registrar in exercise of his powers under the provisions of the Act. If for any reason the appellants are aggrieved by the said order, they could have questioned the said order before the appropriate authorities provided under the Act. Bypassing those remedies, the appellants could not have approached this Court. Keeping the first principles in mind, the learned Single Judge has refused to entertain the writ petition. We do not see any error in the orders passed by the learned W.A.No.388 of 2008 - 2 - Single Judge, which would call for our interference. Therefore, the Writ Appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice K.M.Joseph vku/- Judge