J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The question arising for consideration in this writ petition is whether Ext.P17 order of the 1^st respondent rejecting Ext.P15 statutory Revision Petition filed under Section 87 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act challenging Ext.P14 Enquiry Report under Section 65 is justifiable or not?

2. The 1^st petitioner is a Co-operative Society/Bank. The 2^nd petitioner is the President of the Society. By an order dated 01.01.2017, the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies ordered enquiry under Section 65 in respect of disbursement of loans by the Society and the financial structure and security of the Society. The 3^rd respondent-Assistant Registrar, who was the Enquiry Officer, submitted Ext.P14 report. Ext.P14 report disclosed irregularities in the functioning of the Society.

3. The petitioners came to know about Ext.P1 Enquiry Report only when an order was issued under Section 68(1). The petitioners thereupon filed Ext.P15 Revision Petition before the Government. The Government rejected Ext.P15 Revision Petition stating that there is no provision under Section 87 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act for filing revision against Ext.P15 Enquiry Report. The petitioners are challenging Ext.P17 order of the Government.

4. The petitioners state that as per Section 87, the Government has revisional power in respect of any proceeding, not being a proceeding in respect of which an appeal to the Tribunal is provided by Section 82, to satisfy himself or themselves as to the regularity of such proceeding, or the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision passed or order made thereon, an if in any case, it appears to the Government that any such decision or order should be modified, annulled, reversed or remitted for reconsideration, the Government may pass orders accordingly. The petitioners contend that since an appeal is not provided by Section 82 against a Section 65 Enquiry Report, Ext.P15 Revision Petition is legal and maintainable. The petitioners also pleaded that the findings in the Section 65 report are without application of mind, illegal, perverse and hence Ext.P14 Enquiry Report is liable to be set aside.

5. The 2^nd respondent-Joint Registrar resisted the writ petition filing counter affidavit . The 2^nd respondent stated that Section 87 deals with powers of revision of Registrar and Government. The Revision Petition filed against an Enquiry Report is not maintainable. Ext.P14 Enquiry Report is neither any proceeding nor any decision or order. It is only an enquiry report.

6. The 2^nd respondent pointed out that inquiry under Section 68(1) is going on to find out the loss caused to the Society by the overvaluation of mortgaged landed property in 78 loans. The petitioners will be getting opportunity to controvert the findings in the Enquiry Report in the inquiry under Section 68(1). The writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed.

7. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in K.T. Velayudhan v. State of Kerala and others [AIR 2000 Ker 125] to urge that a Revision Petition will lie under Section 87 against any proceedings against which no appeal lies. The question whether a Revision Petition would lie against an order of the Director of Co-operative Audit came up for consideration before a Division Bench in W.A. No.288/2018 and the Division Bench directed the Government to consider the Revision Petition filed under Section 87 against the order of the Director of Co- operative Audit. Going by the said direction given by the Division Bench of this Court, a Revision Petition is maintainable against Section 65 enquiry report also, urged the counsel for the petitioner. In the judgment in Peroor Service Co-operative Society Limited v. State of Kerala and others [2017 (4) KLT SN 110], a Single Bench of this Court also held that since there is no provision to file appeal against an Audit Certificate, a review petition is maintainable before the Registrar of Co-ope