IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 20679 of 2004(J) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.GOPI PILLAI, MEMBER NO.3525, EDAMON SERVICE CO-OP. BANK, EDAMON, RESIDING AT MADATHILAZHIKATHU VEEDU, VELLIMALA, EDAMON, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KOLLAM. 3. THE URUKUNNU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, URUKUNNU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE EDAMON SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, EAMON P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.V.VINODKUMAR SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.20679/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CRP/1624/03 DT. 21.6.04 ISSUED BY R2. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.20679 of 2004-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The third respondent has been granted sanction to open a new branch. That decision of the competent authority is challenged by the petitioner, who is only a member of the fourth respondent bank on the ground that the new branch of the third respondent would be within the area of operation of the fourth respondent. If that be so, it was for the fourth respondent co-operative bank, as a rival institution, to challenge the decision of the statutory authority granting sanction to the third respondent to open a branch in question. If the fourth respondent has failed to do so, the petitioner can only bring it to the notice of the general body in the democratic institution of a co-operative society and voice grievances against WP(C)20679/2004 -: 2 :- those who are in office as committee members. The petitioner cannot directly challenge the decision of the Registrar in the absence of the rival institution, namely, the fourth respondent challenging the grant of sanction for an additional branch to the third respondent. The writ petition is, hence, dismissed without considering any of the other contentions. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/