IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21013 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ O.I.ABRAHAM, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.LATE ISSAC, URATHUMUDI HOUSE, VENGOOR (P.O), VENGOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DAIRY DEVELOPMENT ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD, COLLECTORATE. 3. VENGOOR MILK MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.E-21 (D), APCOS, VENGOOR REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. 4. BOARD OF DIRECTORS, VENGOOR MILK MARKETING SOCIETY LTD NO.E-21(D) APCOS VANGOOR P.O. SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 21013 OF 2008(B) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was dismissed from the service of the third respondent co-operative society. Instead of filing of a statutory appeal before the Board of Directors of the society, he filed the appeal to the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal. That appeal was rejected as not maintainable. Thereafter, he filed an appeal before the Board of Directors of the society. By that time, it was beyond the statutory period and the committee dismissed that appeal on the ground of limitation. The effect of such dismissal is that the dismissal order on the basis of the decision of the sub-committee stands confirmed. Therefore, that is the final decision of the society, which the petitioner can challenge in appropriate arbitration proceedings under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. This Court is not interfering with the decision of the appellate authority in the society namely, the committee, particularly when the statute prescribes an outer limit to condone the delay of the appeal. Hence, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner, as stated above, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE skr/22/7/08 // True copy // P.A. to Judge.