Elections in co-operative societies must continue from the last valid stage if intervened unjustifiably, preventing arbitrary interference with electoral rights.

J U D G M E N T

P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the judgment dated 9.4.2021 in W.P.(C) No.5491 of 2021. Petitioners in the writ petition are the appellants. Parties and documents are referred to in this judgment, as they appear in the writ petition for convenience.

2. The dispute in the writ petition pertains to election to Vaikom Taluk Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd.(the Bank), a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act,1969 (the Act). The petitioners are members of the Bank. The term of the Managing Committee of the Bank was due to expire on

16.01.2021. Before the expiry of the term, the Bank resolved to conduct election on 10.01.2021, and on the basis of the resolution of the Bank, the fifth respondent, the State Co- operative Election Commission (the Commission) issued Ext.P1 notification. In terms of Ext.P1 notification, the date for publication of the draft voters list, the date for raising objection to the draft voters list, the date for publication of the final voters list, the date for submitting nomination, the date for withdrawal of the nomination and the date of election were fixed as 05.12.2020, 05.12.2020, 15.12.2020, 28.12.2020, 30.12.2020 and 10.01.2021 respectively. On 8.1.2021, the Commission postponed the election in terms of Ext.P4 order purportedly on the basis of a complaint that persons who are not entitled to membership in the Bank have been enrolled as members of the Bank. Since the election was postponed, the Managing Committee of the Bank was superseded and an Administrator was appointed in its place. The petitioners challenged Ext.P4 order in the writ petition.

3. The Administrator appointed in the place of the Managing Committee has later directed the Bank to make available Rs.1,92,525/- for sending notices to persons who have been enrolled as members illegally. The said direction of the Administrator was challenged in W.P.(C) No.3935 of 2021.

4. The writ petitions were heard together. As far as W.P.(C) No.5491 of 2021 was concerned, though the learned Single Judge took the view that the grievance voiced in the complaint, on the basis of which the election process was interdicted, is one to be raised in a properly instituted election petition, the learned Judge directed the election to be conducted de novo, after rejecting the specific contention of the petitioners that the election process shall be resumed from the stage at which it was stopped. As far as W.P.(C) No.3935 of 2021 was concerned, the learned Judge found that the direction impugned therein was bad. W.P.(C) No.3935 of 2021, in the circumstances, was allowed and W.P.(C) No.5491 of 2021 was allowed in part, directing the Administrator to take steps to conduct de novo election in the Bank. The petitioners are aggrieved by the judgment in W.P.(C) No.5491 of 2021 to the extent the learned Single Judge declined the prayer of the petitioners for a direction to the Commission to resume the election process from the stage at which it was stopped. Hence this appeal.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Standing Counsel for the Commission, the learned counsel for the Bank as also the learned Government Pleader.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that having interfered with the decision of the Commission in interdicting the election process, in so far as it was found that the interdiction is illegal, the learned Judge ought to have directed the Commission to resume the election process from the stage at which it was stopped.

7. The learned Standing Counsel for the Commission submitted that it is having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that the learned Single Judge has refrained from setting aside the order of the Commission and in the said circumstances, the direction to conduct the election de novo is in order.

8. The learned counsel for the Bank supported the stand of the Commission. It was also pointed out tha