The main legal point established in the judgment is that the opportunity to state objections under S.32 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act is related to specific allegations of irregularities, and the source of the information is not a component of the rule of natural justice.

G.H. Guttal, J.

1. The petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, by the Cochin Cooperative Hospitals Society Limited and members of its committee, raises an interesting question. The question" is whether denial of access to administrative reports which constitute the source of information on which the notice inviting objections to the proposed supersession of a cooperative society, issued under S.32 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, is based, is a violation of the principles of natural justice.

2. Indira Gandhi Cooperative Hospital, Cochin, is run by the petitioner No. 6, the Cochin Cooperative Hospital Society Limited, hereinafter referred to as the Society, which is registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 are members of the managing committee of the society which is also known as the Board of Directors. The petitioners impugn the validity of the order No. 7160/1992 dated 25th February, 1993 (Ext. P9 to the petition), whereby the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Government of Kerala, the respondent No. 1 herein, in exercise of his power under S.32 of the Act, removed the managing committee of the society and appointed the Asst. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Kanayannur, the respondent No. 3, as the Administrator of the society for a period of six months.

3. The respondent No. 1 served on the petitioners notice No. HM 7160/92 dated 2-12-1992 (Ext. P1). In this notice he listed 17 irregularities allegedly committed by the committee. The notice calls upon the petitioners to state their objections as envisaged by sub-s.(1) of S.32 of the Act. The notice refers to the inspection reports dated 22-8-1992, 20-10-1992 and 26-11-1992 by the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies and a report dated 15-7-1992 by the District Cooperative Bank Limited. While the "opportunity to state its objections" was given by the notice dated 2-12-1992 (Ext. P1), copies of these reports were not supplied to the petitioners in spite of repeated requests. The petitioners urge that the denial of access to these reports which is the source of information on which the "opportunity to state its objections" is based, is a violation of the principles of natural justice.

4. The "opportunity to state its objections" is related to specific allegations of irregularities made in the letter dated 2-12-1992 (Ext. P1). In order to understand what the petitioners were called upon to object, to, a summary of the irregularities allegedly committed by the petitioners is given below.

Payment of exorbitant interest of Rs. 2,85,577.92 to architects, running the hospital without a competent chief executive in breach of bye law No. 31(3), appointment of staff in breach of R.80 and the Registrar's circular dated 28-11-1989, keeping the ambulance van purchased with Government aid of Rs. 94,651.47 in a condition of disrepair while continuing to pay salary to the driver, purchase of air conditioner from a sole trader, of laproscope at a price higher than sanctioned by the committee, sale of dental chair at a loss, purchase of image intensifier for Rs. 9,61,000/- privately, against a tender for Rs 7.75 lakhs, irregular acquisition of accommodation for a dispensary and unwarranted expenditure on its repairs, opening an account in a commercial bank in breach of rules which required such account to be opened in a cooperative bank, removal of living members on a statement by the President that they are dead and admission of members in breach of rules, are some of the accusations which the petitioners were called upon to meet.

5. The irregularities set out in the last paragraph are undoubtedly serious. The notice dated 2-12-1992 (Ext. P1) consists of 12 typewritten pages, containing the details such as the number and date of resolution where necessary names, of persons and places and value of properties and other particulars.

The petitioners in their letters dated 12-12-19