The enforcement of a no-confidence motion against a managing committee is valid under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, despite the absence of specific procedural rules, reinforcing the democratic principles mandated by the 97th amendment to the Constitution.

JUDGMENT

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.01.2022 in W.P.(C) No.5 of 2022. The appellants were the petitioners in the writ petition.

2. The third respondent is an apex society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act , 1969 (the Act). Its general body consists of 76 primary societies. The appellants represent two among the members of the third respondent in its general body and have been elected in that capacity to the Managing Committee of the third respondent as well. On 30.10.2021, a no confidence motion was moved by two other members of the third respondent against its Managing Committee and a notice requiring convening of a general body to consider the no confidence motion was given by 31 other members of the third respondent to the Registrar. On 13.12.2021, the Registrar issued Ext.P8 order invoking Section 30 (3) of the Act, nominating an officer under him to call for a special general body of the third respondent to consider the no confidence motion. The officer authorised by Ext.P8 order thereupon decided to convene the special general body of the third respondent on 06.01.2022 and instructed the Managing Director of the third respondent to issue notice of the proposed special general body to the members. Ext.P9 is one of the notices issued by the Managing Director in this regard. The writ petition was instituted at that point of time challenging Ext.P8 order and Ext.P9 notice. The appellants also sought a declaration that the amendment made to Section 33 (1) of the Act in terms of Act 33 of 1971 to the extent it enables appointment of new committee or Administrator on a no confidence motion passed by the general body against the existing committee stands repealed by the application of the doctrine of desuetude and also a declaration that a no confidence motion cannot be moved against an elected managing committee of a Society.

3. In terms of the interim order passed on05.01.2022, the learned Single Judge had permitted consideration of the no confidence motion proposed on 06.01.2022 but directed that the motion if passed shall not be given effect to without orders from this Court.

4. The following were the questions formulated for decision by the learned Single Judge :

(a) Is there any provision under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as “KCS Act”) enabling a no-confidence motion be moved against the Managing Committee of a Society?

(b) Is that part of Section 33 of the KCS Act providing for moving of a no-confidence motion against the Managing Committee, a dead letter, applying the doctrine of desuetude? (c) In the absence of any Rules prescribing the procedure for moving a motion of no-confidence against a Managing Committee in terms of of the KCS Act, is not the statutory provision unenforceable/ sterile?

(d) Does the Registrar have the power to summon a Special General Body under Section 30 (3) of the KCS Act for considering a motion of no-confidence against a Managing Committee?

(e) Can the Registrar summon a General Body under Section 33 of the KCS Act without requisition from the prescribed number of members in terms of Section 30 (1)?

(f) Can the delegatee of the Registrar further delegate the power under Section 30 (3) of the KCS Act to summon a Special General Body Meeting?

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties on either side, the learned Single Judge answered all the questions against the appellants and consequently dismissed the writ petition.

5. In the meanwhile, the no confidence motion was passed with 39 votes favouring the motion a