IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH DECEMBER 2008 / 9TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 38138 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUNEESH PRABHAKARAN S/O.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 25 YEARS, KULATHINGAL HOUSE, MUTTAM PO,EDAPPALLY, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT,MEMBER SHIP NO.5263. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM SRI.RENJITH THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MUTTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 1284, MUTTAM,THODUPUZHA , IDUKKI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ELECTORAL OFFICER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. RETURNING OFFICER MUTTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, O/O. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 38138 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner, a member of the first respondent bank, submitted Ext.P3 objections to the list of eligible voters as published by the Society through the Returning Officer for the purpose of the election to the Committee of that Society. Ext.P2 bye-laws describes the area of operation of the Society and states in Clause 5(a), the eligibility for membership. Any person of more than 18 years of age and who has the necessary qualification in terms of Kerala Co- operative Societies Act (KCS Act) and Rules and the bye-laws, and, residing or owning immovable properties within the area of operation of the Society, is entitled to be a member. Therefore, any objection with reference to the area of operation can be considered only if there is a specific assertion that the person about whom such objection is raised does not reside and does not hold any immovable property within the area of operation. Without these two specific assertions being made qua, each person who is saddled with such allegation, the Returning Officer has no obligation to look into any such objections. Exts.P3 and P3(a) read together do not disclose WPC : 38138/08 -:2:- any assertion by the petitioner regarding either among these two limbs though the assertion has to be of both. All that is stated in Ext.P3 is that people who are residing outside the area of operation and enlisted in Ext.P3(a) are included in the list. I do not therefore find any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned Ext.P4 by which the Returning Officer has refused to consider the objections. Obviously, if the petitioner has any further objections in that regard, such question can be considered, on facts, only in a proper election dispute under Section 69 of the KCS Act. Without prejudice to that course, this Writ Petition is dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE ttb 30/12