The court affirmed the necessity of providing a hearing to the affected party before imposing a surcharge under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.

Headnote:(A) Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 - Section 68(1) and Section 68(2) - Proceedings initiated against the Secretary of a Society - Petitioner contended that the belated issuance of the Section 68(1) report hindered effective defense - Court emphasized the necessity of a hearing before imposing surcharge due to civil consequences. (Paras 1-3)

(B) Right to be heard - The court reiterated that an opportunity for hearing must be provided to the person issued with a notice under Section 68(1) before proceeding with the matter. (Paras 2-3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, as the Secretary of the Society, challenged the belated issuance of the Section 68(1) report, claiming it impeded his ability to defend against the notice issued under Section 68(2).

Findings of Court:
The court directed the 1st respondent to hear the petitioner based on the Section 68(1) report and other contentions, ensuring a fair process.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was afforded a fair opportunity to defend against the surcharge notice due to the timing of the report's issuance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that civil consequences necessitate a hearing for the affected party before any surcharge is imposed, reinforcing the principle of natural justice.

Result: Writ petition disposed of.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the erstwhile Secretary of the

3^rd respondent Society. The 1^st respondent initiated proceedings under Section 68 (1) of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short 'the Act'). Pursuant to the same, the petitioner has been issued with Ext.P6 notice under (2) of the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was issued with (1) report after the issuance of Ext.P6. The petitioner submits that since he has been issued with the copy of (1) report belatedly, he could not effectively defend the matter before the 1^st respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In the nature of the order I propose to pass, notice to respondents 2 and 3 is dispensed with.

3. Since an order of surcharge entail civil consequence, the person who has been issued with Section 68 (1) notice has to be given an opportunity of hearing as provided under the said section. Therefore, since the petitioner has now been served with (1) report, there will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to hear the petitioner on the basis of the said report and other contentions to be advanced by the petitioner, and take the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P6 to a logical conclusion. The petitioner shall therefore, appear before the 1^st respondent on 21.04.2025 at 11 .a.m for hearing. The Joint Registrar shall pass orders in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner and any other affected parties, expeditiously.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 15867

HIGH COURT OF KERALAMurali Purushothaman, JMADHUSUDHANANPILLAI K.R – AppellantVersusTHE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) – RespondentWP(C) 15908/2025

The court affirmed the necessity of providing a hearing to the affected party before imposing a surcharge under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Murali Purushothaman, J
MADHUSUDHANANPILLAI K.R – Appellant
Versus
THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) – Respondent
WP(C) 15908/2025