Point of Law: Section 69 of Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 specifically provides a remedy for resolution of dispute in connection with election to Managing Committee of any Society.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioners, who are members of the 12th respondent-Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank, Thiruvalla, have filed this writ petition seeking to call for the records leading to the acceptance of nominations of respondents 1 to 9 as their names were reflected in Exts.P3 and P7 by issuing a writ quashing the acceptance of their nominations.

2. The term of the Managing Committee of the 12th respondent-Bank is to expire on 23.11.2023. Ext.P1 Notification for election to the Managing Committee of the Bank was published and the polling is scheduled to be held on 03.11.2023. The petitioners state that 30 nominations were received. After scrutiny, the Returning Officer published final list, which contained 28 names.

3. The petitioners state that after the publication of Ext.P2 list, the Returning Officer enquired with the Secretary of the Bank regarding the loan outstanding position of the candidates and matters as regards their qualification to contest in election. The Secretary provided Ext.P4 information to the Returning Officer which showed that respondents 1 to 9 are either in default or suffer other disqualifications in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, the Rules and the Bye-laws of the Bank. The petitioners would urge that going by the information provided by the Secretary, acceptance of the nominations of respondents 1 to 9 by the Returning Officer is illegal and it is an improper exercise of power.

4. The petitioners state that respondents 1 to 6 are candidates contesting from the constituency of persons who have taken loans from the Society. Respondents 1 to 6 have not taken any loan from the Society. Therefore, respondents 1 to 6 are ineligible to file nominations from the loanees' constituency. Respondents 7 and 8 are in default to the Society and arbitration proceedings have been initiated against them. Such candidates are disqualified from contesting or being appointed as Members of the Board of Directors of Co-operative Society under Rule 44(1)(c) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules.

5. The petitioners further submit that one seat in the Managing Committee of each Society shall be reserved for members having a deposit of Rs.10,000/-and above, as per Section 28(1)(1C) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The 9th respondent does not have any deposit in the Bank. Still, his nomination was accepted without regard to the objection raised by the 1st petitioner at the time of scrutiny.

6. It is urged that election is notified to fill the 13 vacancies in the Board of Directors of the Bank. The nominations submitted by nine candidates are liable to be rejected. Any election with such huge number of candidates, who are disqualified for contesting elections, would render the election process a farce.

7. Respondents 1 to 9 resisted the writ petition filing counter affidavit. The respondents submitted that the writ petition itself is not maintainable as the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy to approach the Co-operative Arbitration Court under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, for redressal of their grievance.

8. On behalf of respondents 1 to 9, it is submitted that they are eligible A Class Members of the Bank holding requisite minimum number of shares of the Bank. They all are eligible to contest in the forthcoming election by virtue of Rule 35A(4) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. Respondents 1, 7 and 8 have not received any notice from the Bank informing them about the defaulted loan amounts.

No award was passed against them by the competent authority. The notices in the execution petitions are illegal and are without passing any award for the defaulted loan amounts.

9. The respondents further submitted that the 9th respondent approached the Secretary of the Bank on 13.10.2023 to deposit Rs.10,000/-in his account for contesting the constituency of depositors. However, the Secretary was not ready to accept the deposi