IMPORTANT POINTS
• No constituency which is not provided in the Byelaws, except statutorily mandated, shall be incorporated in the election notification by the Election Commission; and to that extent, the term in Ext.P3 notification, if it is intended to ensure that only the delegates belonging to a particular Revenue District shall have the right to elect the member of that District, will certainly obtain no support in law and will require to be struck down.
• The Byelaws provide that where a Primary Bank has operations in more than one District, the delegate of such bank shall seek election only from the headquarters where such bank is situated. This provision cannot be interpreted in any other manner and cannot be employed to impair the voting rights of the delegates by confining such rights solely to elect the member from his/her home Revenue District. This is impermissible going by Section 28(1) of the KCS Act and Rule 35A of the KCS Rules, which gives full primacy to the Byelaws of the Society, while the Election Commission conducts elections.

1. This writ petition was originally listed today to consider the grant of interim orders, as has been sought for by the petitioners. However, pointing out that elections to the Managing committee of the 6th respondent-Apex Society are scheduled on 26/06/2019, a request was made at the Bar by the various counsel for the respondents that, if this Court is so inclined, the writ petition itself may be heard and disposed of finally. Since the petitioners also supported this course, I proceeded to hear the matter finally.

2. The singular allegation of the petitioners in this case, who are stated to be the delegates chosen by the various Primary Societies entitled to vote in the elections to the Managing Committee of the Apex Society, namely, the 6th respondent Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank' for short), is against Ext.P3 election notification, issued by the 3rd respondent-State Co-operative Election Commission, whereby only the persons belonging to a particular Revenue District have been permitted to vote to elect the member from the said District. The petitioners, referring to Ext.P1 Byelaws of the Bank, submit that the Board of Directors of the said Bank are stipulated to contain the following numbers, as is available from Clause 28 thereof:-

28. The Board shall consist of the following Directors namely:

1. One member for each revenue district elected by and from among the delegates of share holding primary banks provided however that where a share holding primary bank has area of operations in more than one District the delegate of such bank shall seek election from the district where the head quarters of the bank is situated.

(a) Three woman member elected by and from among the delegates of share holding Primary banks.

(b) One member belonging to SC/ST elected by and from among the delegates of share holding Primary Banks.

3. The petitioners thus assert that the term of Ext.P3 election notification, restricting a delegate, belonging to a particular Revenue District, to vote solely for the purpose of electing a member to a District is illegal and unlawful, since the elections are not conducted for each Revenue District as separate constituencies but for the whole State. They, therefore, pray that the impugned restriction in Ext.P3 be vacated or struck down by this Court, so as to enable all the delegates to vote for all the members to various Revenue Districts.

4. I have heard Shri.George Poonthottam, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri.Arun Chandran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Shri.R.Lakshmi Narayan, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent-State Co operative Election Commission; Shri.M.Sasindran, the learned Standing counsel appearing for respondents 6 and 7 and the learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.C.S.Sheeja, appearing on behalf of the official respondents.

5. Shri.George Poonthottam, the learned Senior Counsel, began his submissions by assertively referring to the afore extracted portions of the Byelaws and contending that going by Section 28(1) of the Kerala Co operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the KCS Act' for short) and Rule 35A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the KCS Rules' for short), the Election Commission cannot vary from the specific stipulations contained in the Byelaws with respect to the area/constituencies for elections to the Board of Directors of a Society. He says that, in the instant case, since Ext.P1 Byelaws are unequivocally clear that every delegate will have the right to vote for every member of each constituency, the reservation in Ext.P3 election notification, that they will confine their votes for election of the member of an individual Revenue District is untenable and unconstitutional. He, therefore, prays that Ext.P3, to this extent, be struck down appropriately by this Court.

6. In answer to the afore submi