Service disputes under Co-operative Societies must be resolved through arbitration as per Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioners state that the 1^st petitioner is a Society registered under the provisions of the Co- operative Societies Act and the 2^nd petitioner is the Managing Committee of the Society. They are deeply aggrieved by the proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent rescinding a decision of the Disciplinary Sub Committee of the Society dismissing the 3^rd respondent from the service of the Society, after a domestic enquiry conducted so also the decisions of the Managing Committee upholding the dismissal order.

2. The 3^rd respondent, while holding the post of Accountant and functioning as Secretary in- charge of the Society, was proceeded in a disciplinary action for serious misconduct and a memo of charges was issued on 24.05.2024. On detection of further misconduct, yet another memo of charges was issued on

19.07.2024.

3. Misconducts alleged were of serious nature and for the smooth conduct of the enquiry, it was felt that the retention of the 3^rd respondent in duty is not desirable. She was hence kept under suspension by the decision dated 02.05.2024 of the Managing Committee of the Society.

4. Against the suspension order, a petition was preferred by the 3^rd respondent before the 2^nd respondent - Assistant Registrar.

5. As the very entertainment of the petition under Rule 176 of the Co-operative Societies Rules was unsustainable, the Society was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P(C) No.23856/2024. This Court, at the admission stage, issued an interim order staying further proceedings in relation to the notice.

6. Domestic enquiry was proceeded with, which ultimately resulted in dismissal of the 3^rd respondent from service. W.P(C) No.23856/2024 was ultimately disposed of by this Court by judgment dated

21.05.2025.

7. Challenging the dismissal order, the 3^rd respondent filed an appeal before the Appeal Committee of the Society and the appeal was dismissed by the Managing Committee.

8. No dispute was raised by the 3^rd respondent before the Arbitration Court. But, it seems that a representation was preferred before the Joint Registrar to take further action in terms of the judgment of this Court in W.P(C) No.23856/2024. Thereafter, the Joint Registrar issued a notice dated 21.08.2025.

9. The President and Secretary appeared and brought to the notice of the Joint Registrar that the remedy available to the 3^rd respondent is to raise an arbitration dispute and the Joint Registrar has no power, authority or jurisdiction to entertain any further representation.

10. Joint Registrar has Issued an order, by which the proceedings of the Disciplinary Sub Committee and the order of the Appellate Committee were rescinded invoking the provisions of Rule 176 of the Co-operative Societies Rules. The remedy provided is under Section 69 (d) of the Co-operative Societies Act and not otherwise.

11. After the constitution of the Co-

operative Arbitration Court under Section 70A of the Co- operative Societies Act, the Registrar or any other person vested with the powers of the Registrar or the Government cannot entertain any matter relating to service dispute. If any decision affecting the rights of the parties on a service dispute occurs, the Registrar has to keep his hands off, contend the petitioners.

12. Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the 3^rd respondent and resisted the writ petition. The counsel denied all the material allegations made by the petitioners. Ext.P10 order has been passed for just and sufficient reasons, contend the petitioners.

13. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd resp