This writ petition relates to Parur Taluk Merchants’ Co-operative Society Ltd. No.E.1060. An 11 member Committee came into office on 24-12-2001. Respondents 3 and 4 were elected as President and Vice President respectively and the petitioner and respondents 5 to 10 were the members of the Managing Committee. The said Managing Committee is stated to be the first elected committee after the registration of the Society.

2. The Society, not being in a financial position to adopt the statutory staff pattern, provide for the appointment of an elected member to work as Secretary in an honorary capacity instead of paid Secretary under Rule 188 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”). The petitioner, an elected member, was thus made the honorary Secretary.

3. This writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P6 proceedings by which a meeting was convened to discuss a no-confidence motion against the petitioner the honorary Secretary – and for a direction to the statutory authorities, namely, respondents 1 and 2 to refrain from proceeding with the request for consideration of the no-confidence motion. A further direction is also sought for to interdict respondents 7 to 10 participating in the meeting to consider the no-confidence motion, on ground that they are disqualified persons.

4. I shall first deal with the relief sought against the participation of respondents 7 to 10 in the meeting. Even going by the petitioner’s case, no order has been passed by the statutory authorities, disqualifying the said persons. So much so, as held in Sasisekharan Nair v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, 2006 (1) KLT 255, the said persons cannot be treated as disqualified unless the statutory authority has passed an order to that effect. The said contention and the claim for relief against respondents 7 to 10 thus fail.

5. Section 28AA (2) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short, the “Act”) provides that a committee shall remove from office the President, Vice-President or the Treasurer or any other officer of the committee if a motion expressing want of confidence in any or all of them is carried with the support of the majority of the members of such committee in accordance with the procedure as may be prescribed. Section 2(n) of the Act defines the term “officer” as follows:

“(n) “Officer” means the President, Vice-President, Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary, Manager, member of committee or Treasurer and includes a Liquidator, Administrator and any other person empowered under the rules or the bye-laws to give directions in regard to the business of a co-operative society.” (emphasis supplied)

6. The term “officer” includes any person empowered under the bye-laws to give directions in regard to the business of a co-operative society. Any member of the committee is also an officer, going by the definition of that term. In the absence of a paid Secretary, the petitioner is, admittedly, appointed as the Secretary only on an honorary basis and his such appointment to work in lieu of a paid secretary does not improve his quality of appointment from anything more than could be co-terminus with the term of the committee. So much so, he is only an officer of the committee and can be removed by proceedings under sub-section (2) Section 28AA of the Act. The contention of the petitioner to the contrary is hence rejected.

7. The next contention of the petitioner is that the notice for the meeting was sent by registered post on 21-2-2005 and received by him on 22-2-2005 while the meeting was scheduled to be held on 7-3-2005 before the expiry of 15 clear days as contemplated under Rule 43A of the Rules. According to the petitioner, under such circumstances, the meeting is one without a valid notice as provided by Rule 43A and is, therefore, invalid.

8. Section 28AA of the Act provides for only the support of the simple majority of the members of the committee to carry the no-confidence motion. No