IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 14TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 21175 of 2005(U) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. G.SASIDHARAN, AGED 50, S/O.GANGADHARA PANICKER, REVATHY MANDIRAM, KIDARA KUZHI, VENGANOOR P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ( NOW WORKING AS MANAGER HANTEX EXCLUSIVE SHOWROOM, THAMPANOOR). 2. K.S.SURENDRAN NAIR, AGED 48, S/O.P.KRISHNAN NAIR, CHANDRA BHAVAN, TC 18/1110, TAGORE ROAD, ( NOW WORKING AS MANAGER, HEAD OFFICE DEPOT, HANTEX). 3. N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, AGED 55, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, THIRUVATHIRA, VAZHUTHOOR, NEYYATTINKARA (NOW WORKING AS PACKER, GARMENT UNIT, HANTEX, OOTTAKKUZHI, THIRUVANANTHAPRAM. 4. K.SOMASEKHARANA NAIR, AGED 58, S/O.KESAVA PILLAI, REVATHY, CHAVADINADA, VENGANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.H-232, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.H.232, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-682 001. BY ADV. SRI. M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC HANDEX FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21175 OF 2005 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioners are employees of an Apex Society, the 1st respondent here in. The 2nd respondent, Managing Director of that Society issued Exts.P1 and P3 proceedings directing to recover some amount from the petitioners. According to the respondents, the petitioners were responsible in causing some loss to the Co-operative Society. Pro-rata recovery is made from the petitioners under the above said impugned proceedings. This Court cannot judicially review the actions of a Co-operative Society. Even assuming it can do that, it is unnecessary to do that, as the petitioners have other statutory remedies. So they may invoke them. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioners and their right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. If there is any limitation in invoking the statutory remedy, the period during which the writ petition was pending before this Court, shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) ps