SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Ker) 1046

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
Mercy George – Petitioner
Versus
The Kerala State Co-Operative Election Commission, Represented By The Secretary & Others – Respondents
W.P.(C). No. 39027 of 2017
Decided On : 11-12-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:George Poonthottam, Advocate
For the Respondents:K.S. Mohammed Hashim, Spl. Govt. Pleader, P.V. Baby, & T.P. Pradeep, S. Sreedev, M.B. Sandeep, R6 & R8, A.N. Santhosh, Advocates

Headnote:Co operative Societies Act 1969 (Kerala), S. 69 - Co operative Societies Rules 1969 (Kerala), Rr. 28, 27 & 44 - Constitution of India, Art.226 - High court has the right to interfere in the matters relating to the rejection of the documents there in which is patently illegal and total unsustainable grounds as by the writ jurisdiction held under Article 226 of the constitution of India as by not effecting the election calendar.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, who is a member of Kalloorkkad Farmer's Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.2605, the 4th respondent Society, has submitted nomination paper pursuant to Ext.P1 Election Notification dated 09.11.2017 issued by the Kerala State Cooperative Election Commission, the 1st respondent Election Commission, to contest in the election to the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent Society, from the constituency reserved for women members in terms of Section 28A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P2 order dated 30.11.2017 of the 3rd respondent Returning Officer, whereby her nomination paper stands rejected on the ground that she is also a member of Kumaramangalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.4122 and as such, disqualified to contest in the election to the Board of Directors of the 4th respondent Society.

2. After Ext.P2, the 3rd respondent Returning Officer published the list of candidates who have submitted valid nomination papers, which was published on 30.11.2017 itself. After withdrawal of nomination by certain candidates, the 3rd respondent published Ext.P3 final list of candidates, who are contesting in the election scheduled to be held on 16.12.2017, and the said list was published on 01.12.2017. The relief's sought for in this writ petition read thus;

“(i) issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P2 and quash the same; (ii) issue a writ declaring that the rejection of nomination paper submitted by the petitioner for the reason stated in Ext.P2 is illegal on the face of it and therefore the said decision be set aside being bad in law; (iii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Returning Officer to include the name of the petitioner among the list of candidates for the election notified to be held as per Ext.P1.”

3. On 06.12.2017, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court issued notice on admission by special messenger to respondents 4 to 9 and the learned Special Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 3.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4, 8 and 9 and also the learned counsel for respondents 5, 6 and 7.

5. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to the legality or otherwise of Ext.P2 order passed by the 3rd respondent Returning Officer, whereby the nomination paper submitted by the petitioner to contest in the election to the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent Society scheduled to be held on 16.12.2017 stands rejected.

6. By Ext.P2 order passed by the 3rd respondent Returning Officer the nomination paper submitted by the petitioner to contest in the election to the Managing Committee of Kalloorkkad Farmer's Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.2605, the 4th respondent Society, stands rejected on the ground that she is also a member of Kumaramangalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.4122 and as such, disqualified to contest in the election to the Board of Directors of the 4th respondent Society. During the course of arguments, on a specific query made by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner became a member of Kumaramangalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.4122 prior to her enrolment as a member of Kalloorkkad Farmer's Co-operative Bank Ltd. No.2605.

7. Clause (oaa) of Section 2 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for brevity 'the Act') defines the term 'Primary Agricultural Credit Society' to mean a Service Cooperative Society, a Service Co-operative Bank, a Farmers Service Co-operative Bank and a Rural Bank, the principal object of which is to undertake agricultural credit activities and to provide loans and advances for agricultural purposes, the rate of interes
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top