Disqualification provisions require strict interpretation and cannot rely on conjecture; inferred involvement in a business inconsistent with society is insufficient for disqualification.

JUDGMENT

(Made by R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

The 4^th respondent in WP(MD).No.7710 of 2020 has filed the present writ appeal challenging the order of the writ Court wherein he has been found to be disqualified to be a member of the Co-operative Credit Society.

(A)Factual Matrix:

2.The appellant herein is a member of Aralvaimozhi Primary Agriculture Co-operative Credit Society. He contested the election for Board of Director in Kanyakumari District Co-operative Union and got elected as President. Immediately, after declaration of results, one George Newton had filed WP(MD).No.20303 of 2019 challenging the final list of Elected Board of Directors of the Kanyakumari District Co-operative Union Limited primarily on the ground that the appellant herein is running a Private Finance Company in the name and style of 'M/s.Balaji Finance' which is in violation of the Co-operative Societies Act. This Court by an order dated 20.09.2019 held that once results have been declared, the Court cannot interdict to the process. However, granted liberty to the petitioner therein to approach the Chief Election Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Co-operative Societies to ventilate his grievance. However, there are no records to show that the petitioner therein had approached the Chief Election Commissioner.

3.One S.Murugesan has given a representation to the 4^th respondent herein on 24.06.2019 seeking to disqualify the appellant herein on similar grounds. Since the said representation was not considered, he had filed WP(MD).No.17084 of 2019. This Court by an order dated 24.01.2020 had directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner herein and to pass orders in accordance with law.

4.In compliance with the order of this Court in WP(MD).No.17084 of 2019, the 4^th respondent herein had conducted an enquiry and passed an order on 21.02.2020 to the effect that the appellant herein has not suffered any disqualification. Challenging the said order, Mr.Murugesan had filed the above writ petition in WP(MD).No.7710 of 2020. The writ Court by its order dated 03.09.2020 after considering the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, had set aside the order the 4^th respondent and allowed the writ petition wherein a direction was issued to disqualify the appellant herein from the basic membership of the Society. This order is put to challenge in the present writ appeal.

(B).Submissions before the Writ Court:

5.The primary contention of the writ petitioner before the writ Court was as follows:

a)As per byelaws of the Society, a member should not engage himself in any business or industry which would be similar to that of the Society or would be not in consonance or cause prejudice to the functions of the Society. Mr.S.Krishnakumar is running a Pawn Broker Shop in the name and style of 'M/s.Balaji Finance' for which the license stands in the name of his wife. Offering loan to the member of the Society by pledging of the jewels is one of the main functions of the Society. Therefore, Mr.S.Krishnakumar is directly involved in a business which is contrary to the byelaw.

b)Though the Pawn Broker license stands in the name of Krishnakumar's wife namely Sri.Bindhu, Mr.Krishnakumar is shown as a nominee in the said license.

c)Mr.Krishnakumar has taken a shop on lease from Nagercoil Municipality in his name and in the said shop, the pawn broker business is being run.

6.The appellant herein had contended as follows:

(a).That the Society is being run in a different place and it does not have any jurisdiction in a place where pawn broker business is being conducted by his wife.

(b).The pawn broker business does not stand in the nam