IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2009 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16853 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. V.K.RAJU, RESIDING AT CHERUKAYAL KARA VEEDU, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O. 2. SIJU PAUL, NAIRMALYAM, MURUKKUMPUZHA. 3. V.GOPINATHAN, INDIRA BHAVAN, -DO- 4. K.MURALEEDHARAN, PARAYIL VEEDU, THONNACKAL P.O., MURUKKUMPUZHA. 5. ROBERT L. PERARA, THUNDIL VEEDU, MURUKKUMPUZHA. 6. SUDARSANAN, JAYA MANDIRAM, KAILATHUKONAM, KUDAKKADA P.O. 7. SHERLI MIRANDA, SHINDYALAD, EDAVILAKOM, MURUKKUMPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ADMINISTRATOR, MURUKKUMPUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.T.292, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O. MR.I.V.PRAMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.16853/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF the ORDER NO.CRP(1)9135/06 DATED 25/05/2007. P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.AWL.2727/06 IN ARC 27/2006 DATED 22/07/2006. P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1359/1361/07/VIP/M (H.V. AND T) DATED 22/01/2007. P4 : COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.4 DATED 21/05/2007. P5 : COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.9 DATED 21/05/2007. P6 : COPY OF THE LETTER NO.T.293/07 DATED 24/05/2007. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No. 16853 of 2007 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P1, an order of supersession issued under Section 32 of the Co-operative Societies Act on 25/05/2007. 2. Although notice was issued in this writ petition, no order of stay has been passed by this Court. It is now reported by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the elections is also scheduled to be held. Having regard to the long lapse of time, and the subsequent developments, I do not think that it is necessary to consider the contentions raised by the petitioners on merits at this distance of time. 3. The only apprehension expressed before this Court is that their nominations might be rejected on the ground of disqualification. However, having regard to the fact that the period of disqualification can only be for a period of one year from the date of supersession by virtue of Rule 44(1)(k) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules and as the said period also has expired, I do not think that the apprehension is of any basis. The writ petition is, accordingly, closed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg