Petitioner is a member of East Eleri Service Cooperative Bank Limited No.8832. The tenure of the present Managing Committee of the said bank expires on 18.12.2017. Therefore, the Board of Directors decided to conduct an election on 18.11.2017 and accordingly passed a resolution to that effect on 30.9.2017. However, it is later informed that, 1st respondent has taken some objections regarding conduct of election much earlier to the expiry of the term of the present board as it would deny voting rights to newly inducted members. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the Managing Committee of the bank subsequently passed a resolution on 7.10.2017 resolving to conduct election on 9.12.2017. It is also submitted that, the said resolution was forwarded to the 1st respondent for further action. Accordingly Ext.P1 election notification is issued with the statutory stipulations as contained in rule 35A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, according to which, a draft voters list is to be published on 20.10.2017 at 11.00 a.m., submission of objections to the draft voters list, a period of 7 days is granted from 20.10.2017 to 27.10.2017, 28.10.2017 is fixed as to consider the objections raised to the draft voters list, 28.10.2017 is also fixed as for publication of the final voters list, 2.11.2017 is fixed as submission of the nominations, 3.11.2017 is fixed as the date for scrutiny of the nominations and 4.11.2017 is fixed as the date for withdrawing the nominations. Finally election is notified to be conducted on 18.11.2017. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 notification is published in the vernacular dailies as is contemplated under sub-rule 3 of rule 35A only on 22.10.2017 and therefore, the same is not a valid notification in order to carry on with the election. In this context, the pleadings made by the petitioner at paragraph 3 of the writ petition is relevant, which is as follows :

“It is submitted that out of the blue, an notification was seen published in Malayala Manorama Daily on 22.10.2017carrying a notification issued by the 4th respondent as directed by the 1st respondent notifying the Election. The true copy of the Election Notification dated 21.10.2017 issued by the 1st respondent is produced herewith and marked a Exhibit P1. It is submitted that Exhibit P1 is highly belated. Though the order of the 1st respondent dated 12.10.2017 and the preliminary voters list was published on 20.10.2017 and so also the date submission of objections to the preliminary voters list was commenced from 28.10.2017, the notification was published only on 20.10.2017 and it was published in the newspaper only on 22.10.2017 as seen from Exhibit P1. Therefore, this is a irregularity committed by the respondents in conducting the election. The petitioner intends to contest the election and therefore, he is directly interested in the outcome of the elections. Therefore, the petitioner has locus standi to challenge Exhibit P1 election notification.”

2. Therefore, according to the petitioner, even though the publication was carried out in the vernacular dailies only on 22.10.2017, the draft voters list was published on 20.10.2017 in the notice board of the society.

3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Senior Government Pleader and perused the pleadings and documents on record. I have perused the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent refuting the claims and demands raised by the petitioner, also.

4. On an wholesome appreciation of the arguments advanced at the Bar, in my view the issues raised in this writ petition can be settled by appreciating sub-rules 3 and 4 of rule 35A of Rules, 1969 which read thus:

“(3) The State Election Commission shall notify the details of election to the committee of the society, in two vernacular dailies having wide circulation in the area. A copy of the information shall also be affixed on the Notice Board of the head office and the branches, if any, of the Society. The notification s