Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

The Parties:

1. The State and its officials are the appellants. Respondents 1 to 6 were the office bearers of Indian Red Cross Society, Kerala State Branch (“the office bearers”). The seventh and eighth respondents are Union of India and Indian Red Cross Society (“the Society”) respectively. The ninth respondent claims himself to be the whistle blower (“the Complainant”), though he too was an office bearer of the Red Cross Society.

Procedural History:

2. Initially, the office bearers filed WP (C) No. 24122 of 2016 against the State, its officials, and the Red Cross, questioning the Ext.P1 order of super-session passed by the Government, here, the first appellant. A learned Single Judge of this Court, through judgment, dated 25.08.2016, allowed the writ petition-quashed the order of super-session. Assailing that judgment, the State and its officials have filed this appeal.

Appellation - A Limitation:

3. Before proceeding further, we serve a caveat on ourselves: Two exalted constitutional functionaries of the federal Government-the President of India and the Governor of the State of Kerala-are the principal administrators of the Red Cross Society: one at the Apex or Headquarters level and the other at the State level. They act ex-officio, however. As those constitutional functionaries discharge only their statutory obligations-ex officio, at that-we have referred to them throughout the judgment as the statutory authorities-the Presidents at the respective levels. So, we have dispensed with employing any deferential terms of reference.

Brief Facts:

4. The facts in brief are that while the office bearers were administering the Society’s State Branch, the complainant-one of the office bearers-petitioned (Ext.R2(a)) to the President of the apex body: that the State Branch’s Chairman had been misusing his office and indulging in maladministration. In response, the President through Ext.R2(b) communication forwarded the complaint to the Ministry of Welfare & Family Planning, Government of India, which in turn, through Ext. R2(c), sent it to the Secretary-General of the Society. The communication calls on the Society to act. The Secretary General, through Ext. R2(d), requested the President of the State branch to investigate and to act. Eventually, the President of the State Branch required the Government of Kerala to inquire into the complaint and submit a report.

5. After waiting a while, the President wrote (Ext. R2(d)) to the Hon’ble Chief Minister that the issue be looked into. Enquiry completed, the Government submitted Ext.R2(g) report. Ratified by the State Branch’s President, as seen from the record, the Government issued Ext.P1 orders dated 15.7.2016, superceding the entire Managing Committee. Aggrieved, six members of the Managing Committee-the Chairman, the General Secretary and four Secretaries-filed the writ petition.

6. The office bearers did not, initially, array the whistleblower, so called, in the proceedings. Later, pending the writ petition, they brought him on record as the additional ninth respondent. A learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition through the judgment dated 25th August 2016: The order of super-session was set aside. The impugned judgment, in fact, declares that Ext.P1 order is ultra vires of the State Government. The officials were directed to hand over the reins of administration to the petitioners. It was, then, the Government’s turn to assail the judgment. Thus, this appeal.

Contentions:

Appellants:

7. The learned Advocate General has submitted that the State and its officers could not remain “mute spectators” to the grave allegations of corruption and nepotism against the office-bearers of the Society, which functions under the patronage of its President, the Governor.

8. According to the learned Advocate General, the State, first, acted only on the State-Branch President’s direction; second, it followed the due procedure, enquired into the allegations, submitted a report