JOSEPH D'CRUZ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are members of the fifth respondent society. As part of a Central Government Scheme for the rehabilitation of Ex-Servicemen, the Government of Kerala had provided land for the rehabilitation of Ex-Servicemen of the Army of the erstwhile State of Travancore. For the purpose, an extent of 1500 acres of land in Vechoochira in Thiruvananthapuram district was set apart under the Ex-Servicemen Colonization Scheme. For the effective implementation of the scheme, it was ordered that a Co-operative Society should be formed by the members who were individually allotted with plots of land. Accordingly the fifth respondent society was formed in the year 1951. The membership of the society was limited to 300 numbers, who alone were allotted plots of land. There is also a clause in the scheme that the property allotted to the individual members shall not be transferred to others or sold. However, according to the petitioners some of the persons have transferred the lands allotted to them in violation of the provisions of the scheme. Therefore, the present membership is only 169.

(2.) THE petitioners complain that the present Managing Committee has admitted persons who are ineligible to be members of the society. The bye-law provision entitles only one of the legal heirs of a deceased member to claim membership of the society. Instead, a number of legal heirs have been admitted in the place of some of the deceased members. Thereby there are as many as 10 members from one family, it is alleged. The above act is in gross violation of the provisions of the original scheme as well as the bye- laws.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 5 and 6 producing Exts.R5(a) to R5(e) documents. According to the counter affidavit, the bye-law provision has been amended permitting the legal heirs of the deceased members also to become members of the society. Since the original bye-law provision did not permit admission of more than one legal representative of a deceased member as a member of the society, the general body felt that in order to increase participation of members in the society the bye-law amendment was necessary. It is also contended that the bye-laws were amended in the year 2003 and the amendments were registered on 8-10-2003, as evident from Exts.R5(a) and R5(b). It is contended that the present managing committee has admitted only 34 members additionally. In spite of the addition of new members, the total number of members still remain at 262. Therefore, it is pointed out that the outer limit of 300 members stipulated by the original scheme has still not been violated.