M. S. PAUL Vs. ALAKODE SERVICE COOP. BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. P. No. 7531 of 1990 is a petition filed by one M. S. Paul, a member of the first respondent society. Election to the Managing Committee of the society was held on 21-2-1988. At that time the society was under the management of an administrator. Alleging that the administrator had enrolled new members and had included them in the voters list for the ensuring election petitioner filed O P. No. 9006 of 1987. The Original Petition was disposed of with a direction to take steps for holding the election on the stipulated date It was also observed that any of the aggrieved members can raise objection before the returning officer regarding enrolment of ineligible members. Petitioner filed objections before the returning officer which were overruled by him. The election was conducted as scheduled on 21-2-1988. The election was challenged before the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies. That arbitration case was dismissed, against which an appeal was preferred before the Cooperative Tribunal. The tribunal by its judgment dated 11-7-90 allowed the appeal and found the persons enrolled by the administrator ineligible to vote. The returning officer was directed to hold a fresh election.

(2.) A petition was filed before the 4th respondent to appoint an administrator under S.33 of the Societies Act to manage the affairs of the society. Request was also made to direct the returning officer to conduct the election. Third respondent was appointed as the administrator. It is averred in the petition that he is taking steps to publish the voters list including the persons enrolled by the administrator on 30-11-1987 and 1-12-1987 who were found ineligible by the tribunal's judgment. Hence the original petition seeking to quash Ext. P4 by a writ of certiorari and for issue of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 2, 8 and 9 not to take steps for holding the election in furtherance of Ext. P4 and to conduct election in compliance with Ext. P2 judgment. A direction to third respondent is also sought to publish the voters list showing the names of members who have exercised their franchise at the election conducted on 21-2-1988 excluding the members enrolled by the administrator on 30-11-1987 and 1-12-1987.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 2 it is contended that the administrator has all the power of the managing committee and was entitled to enrol new members. Only persons admitted in violation of R.26 are prevented from exercising the vote or participating in the general body meeting. The returning officer was appointed only on 18-8-1990 and as such persons who have enrolled 60 days before the date of resolution to conduct election are eligible to take part in the election.