IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18285 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SATHYANESAN.K,NITHIN NIVAS,POVATTOR WEST POOVATTOOR PADINJARN,KULAKKAD VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. POVATTOOR WEST MILK PRODUCING, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY IN-CHARGE,MAVADY.PO,KOLLAM. 2. THE DIARY EXTENSION OFFICER,VETTIKAVALA, KOTTARKKARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,KOLLAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,TRIVANDRUM. 5. SMT.BINDU,SECRETARY IN-CHARGE,MAVADY.PO, KOLLAM. 6. SMT.G.KRISHNA PRIYA,ADVOCATE,ENQUIRY OFFICER,PRIYA NIVAS,NEENDAKARA.PO,NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM. 7. SHRI.SOMASEKHAZRAN PILLAI,CONVENOR, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE,POVATTOOR WEST MILK PRODUCING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,'THUSHARAM', POOVATTOR PADINJARE,MAVADY.PO,KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. KC. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.18285 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the Ist day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner was the Secretary of the first respondent Society. It is stated that in May, 2006 he availed of leave for a period of 5 years but however returned and reported for duty in October, 2007. Petitioner submits that he was not permitted to join duty. Disciplinary proceedings are proposed against the petitioner but however by Ext.P8 resolution, the Managing Committee of the first respondent resolved to revoke the suspension of the petitioner and drop further proceedings. It is stated that the 2nd respondent canceled the aforesaid proceedings and thereafter by Ext.P9, appointed an Administrative Committee, under Section 33 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. WP(c).No.18285/09 2 Thereafter the 7th respondent issued Ext.P10 show cause notice proposing to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner to which he gave Ext.P11 reply. Unsatisfied with the reply given, Ext.P12 memo of charges were issued and the petitioner submitted Ext.P13 explanation. Subsequently, it would appear that an Enquiry Officer was appointed and Ext.P14 notice was issued by the Enquiry Officer, posting the enquiry on 28.6.2009. It is submitted that the enquiry was adjourned. It is at this stage that this writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash Exts.P8,P9 order appointing the Administrative Committee, Ext.P12 memo of charges and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner after revoking the suspension and dropping of disciplinary proceedings. In my view, now that the petitioner is facing an enquiry pursuant to Ext.P12 memo of charges and the enquiry is also posted by the Enquiry Officer, it is for the petitioner to appear before the Enquiry Officer, prove his innocence and to get WP(c).No.18285/09 3 exonerated. In so far as the petitioner's case regarding Ext.P9 is concerned, in my view, a reading of Ext.P9 shows that, the said order has been issued, invoking the powers of the Registrar under Section 33 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. This only affects those who are suspended and I feel that it is for those who are affected by Ext.P9 to challenge the same. Therefore, leaving open the contentions raised by the petitioner this writ petition is closed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.18285/09 4