Back
2025 Supreme(Ker) 468
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AMIT RAWAL, K.V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ.
P.A. Abraham S/o P.P. Andrews - Appellant
Versus
B.N. Shyamkumar - Respondent
WA No. 437 of 2025
Decided On : 03-04-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE ANSHIN K.K GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
For the Respondent: SR GP SRI T K VIPINDAS SRI P C SASIDHARAN
IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that the genuineness of resignation letters and quorum for a no-confidence motion must be determined by an expert body, not the writ court.
Headnote:
(A) Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 - Section 33 - Disqualification of members - No-confidence motion against the President of the Society - The court addressed the validity of resignation letters and quorum issues in the no-confidence motion, emphasizing the need for a proper inquiry by the Registrar Co-operative Society. (Paras 6 , 10 )
(B) Judicial Review - The writ court cannot assume the role of an expert and must rely on competent bodies for factual determinations. (Paras 10 )
Facts of the case:
The President of the Society challenged the no-confidence motion and disqualification of members, claiming fabricated resignations and lack of quorum.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the Registrar Co-operative Society to conduct an inquiry into the allegations and determine the validity of the no-confidence motion and resignations.
Issues: The main issues included the genuineness of resignation letters and the quorum for the no-confidence motion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Joint Registrar's dual approach was inappropriate and that factual determinations should be made by an expert body.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions for inquiry.
JUDGMENT :
Amit Rawal, J.
This order shall dispose of four (4) matters; W.A No.437 of 2025 [P.A Abraham and others v. B.N Shyamkumar and Others] arising out of an interim order dated 5.2.2025 in WP(C) No.2902 of 2025, WP(C) No.2902 of 2025 [B.N Shyamkumar v. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General)] filed by the President of the Society challenging the notice Ext.P2 dated 18.1.2025 whereby the Joint Registrar had appointed an Officer to consider the resolution dated 8.1.2025 passed by the members of the Board of Directors expressing no-confidence motion against the President, WP(C) No.1307 of 2025 [P.A Abraham and Others v. Joint Registrar of Co- operative Societies and Others] for seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Joint Registrar to take further steps for appointing a Presiding officer or fixing a date for consideration of no-confidence motion, WP(C) No.3398 of 2025 [Rehna v. and another v. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies(General) and Others] for quashing notice issued by the Joint Registrar, Thiruvananthapuram dated 16.1.2025 taking action of disqualification of the petitioner on the basis of the receipt of the complaint of Sri.Santhosh Kumar being a defaulter as per the provisions of Rule 44 (1) (c) of the Co-operative Societies Rules.
2. The crux of the controversy in all these matters is common and therefore are being disposed of by a common judgment. The controversy involved is that out of 13 members, 1/3rd member ie., 7 had on 8.1.2025 passed a resolution of no- confidence motion against the President Sri.B.N Shyamkumar, writ petitioner in WP(C) No.2902 of 2025. On receipt of the notice, the President submitted an application to the Joint Registrar that two of the members have been disqualified being in default and regarding two members have submitted resignation on 7.1.2025.
3. On the receipt of the aforementioned no-confidence motion and as well as the letter submitted by the respondent, the then President, that the resolution of no-confidence was lacking full quorum on account of two ambiguities ie., disqualification and default, therefore could not be acted upon, the Joint Registrar General vide order dated 16.1.2025 issued a notice to the members against whom the allegation of disqualification either on account of fault or of resignation, which according to the appellants in the writ appeal is fabricated.
4. Simultaneously, after two days on 18.1.2025 vide order Ext.P2 in WP(C) No.2902 of 2025 had also issued a notice to the President appointing one officer to convene a meeting for discussing the issue of the no-confidence motion.
5. On perusal of the aforementioned facts, it is evident that two opposite steps have been taken; one in terms of the resolution dated 8.1.2025 expressing no-confidence motion against the President by appointing an Officer vide notice dated 18.1.2025, which is under stay in WP(C) No.2902 of 2025; another, for taking an action of disqualification on two aspects ie., the default and resolution.
6. In this view of the incongruous situation, the President had filed a writ petition No.2902 of 2025 seeking the stay of the notice dated 18.1.2025 which is under interim stay and another Writ petition No.1307 of 2025 for issuing a directions to the Joint Registrar to take action against the resolution as well as WP(C) No.3398 of 2025 challenging the notice dated 16.1.2025 of disqualification.
Section 33 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 provides that whenever a resignation is submitted by the member, the date of submission would be considered as resignation.
7. A plea of fraud and fabrication has been taken on behalf of the persons who are a signatory to the no-confidence motion on the ground that the signatures are based upon not of their volition but based upon the fabrication to overcome the hurdle of no confidence motion. It cannot be believed that a person who had submitted a resignation on 7.1.2025, again participated in the proceedings on 8.1.2025 for taking no-
