The government’s exemption under Section 101 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 is valid if justified by the non-functional status of the society.

JUDGMENT

The Managing Committee of the Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd. No.Q-1604 has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P14 order of the Government of Kerala granting exemption from the provisions of Section 7(1(c) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1969 Act') exercising power under Section 101 of the 1969 Act and thus permitting the 5^th respondent to operate within the area of operation of the Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd.

2. Sri. Praveen K. Joy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that Ext.P14 order is not sustainable in law. It is submitted that without considering the purpose behind the provisions of Section 7(1)(c) of the 1969 Act and without any just cause or reason, the Government has granted exemption by exercising the power under Section 101 of the 1969 Act, thereby permitting the 5^th respondent to operate within the area of operation of Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd. It is submitted that when the 5^th respondent amended its bye-laws for including certain areas within the area of operation of Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd., within its area of operation, the question of approval of the amendments was considered by the Joint Registrar (General), Kollam, following Ext.P5 judgment of this Court. It is submitted that the proposal was rejected by Ext.P6 order of the Joint Registrar (General), Kollam, dated 23-12-2019. It is submitted that when the authorities had found no reason to approve the amendment of the bye-laws for including certain areas from the area of operation of the Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd., to the area of operation of the 5^th respondent society, the Government ought not to have exercised its power under Section 101 of the 1969 Act to permit such inclusion. Thus, it is submitted that Ext.P14 is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the decision of this court in Feroke Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. , v. State of Kerala, 1995 (2) KLT 404 to contend that the power of the Government under Section 101 of the 1969 Act cannot be used whimsically or arbitrarily.

3. The learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the 5^th respondent would submit that nothing turns on Ext.P6 order of the Joint Registrar (General), Kollam. It is submitted that under Section 7 (1)(c) of the 1969 Act, the area of operation of two societies of a similar type should not overlap. It is in such circumstances that the amendment of the bye-laws of the 5^th respondent society by including certain areas within the area of operation of Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd. was rejected by the Joint Registrar. It is submitted that the power of the Government under Section 101 of the 1969 Act is wide and for the reasons mentioned in Ext.P14 order the Government thought it fit to grant an exemption and permit the 5^th respondent society to operate within the area of operation of the Kottukkal Service Co-operative Society Ltd. It is submitted that Ext.P14 order was issued in public interest and there is no reason to interfere with it in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for official respondents, and the learned counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent, I am of the view that there is considerable merit in the contention taken by the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent that the rejection of the proposal for amendment of the bye-laws of the 5^th respondent society through Ext.P6 order (following the directions in Ext.P5 judgment of this court) has no bearing on the power bei