RIJI G.NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These matters have been referred to us based on a reference order dated 14/8/2018. Another Division Bench while considering the aforesaid appeal and writ petition observed that the Division Bench judgment in Sankaranarayanan v. Kunhikrishnan (1965 KLT 740) and judgment of a learned single Judge in Benny Peruvanthanam v. Kerala State Co - operative Consumers Federation (2013 (4) KLT 987) do not appear to have laid down the correct law in the light of the decision of Apex Court in Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others v. D.Janardhana Rao and another [(1976) 4 SCC 226] and therefore, it was felt that the matter requires to be heard by a Full Bench.

(2.) The issue involved is with reference to an exemption granted by the Government invoking Section 101 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') Under S.65(5) of the Act, an enquiry under Section 65 has to be completed within a period of six months. The said period at the discretion of the Registrar can be extended, of course, for reasons to be recorded in writing. However, the aggregate period shall not in any way exceed one year. These are cases in which the period of one year had expired and subsequently the Government invoking power u/s 101 of the Act exempted the said society from the application of S.65(5) for a specified period from the date of expiry of the one year period until a future period.

(3.) In Sankaranarayanan's case (supra), Division Bench of this Court was considering whether the State Government had the power to exempt any registered Society from any provisions of the Act invoking S.60 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1932 (Madras) (Madras Act was applicable to erstwhile Malabar area of State of Kerala). As per S.36 of the said Act, a registered society had to carry to its reserve fund a fourth of its net profits and then may contribute an amount not exceeding 10% of the remaining net profits to any charitable purpose. After the specified period, the Government exempted the society from the operation of S.36, and also validated a resolution taken earlier, which was invalid at the time of its inception. It was held that the Government could not have retroactively exempted the society in complying with the statutory provisions and to validate the resolution, which was invalid at the time of its inception.