BENNY P.M Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners 1 to 17 and the husbands of petitioners 18 and 19 were the employees of the 4th respondent Society for various spells in various posts. The Society was liquidated as per the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (the "Act" for short), and the 5th respondent was appointed as the Liquidator w.e.f. 22/3/2013. According to the petitioners, the Society has various properties including 13 " cents of landed property with a head office and godown at Iritty Town. It is stated that, some of the petitioners as well as creditors of the Society approached this Hon'ble Court for arrears of salary and other benefits and this Court issued directions to the liquidator to sell out the properties and clear the liabilities of the Society and consequently it was decided to sell the 13 " cents of property with building and godown at Iritty Town by way of public auction on 13/12/2022 at 2 pm and in the auction conducted on 13/12/2022, the property along with building and godown is purchased by the Punnad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., for a consideration of Rs.5,00,66,000.00 (Rupees Five Crores and Sixty six thousand). It is stated that pursuant thereto, the liquidator is taking steps to clear the liabilities of the Society. However, the petitioners apprehend that their claim would not be considered by the 5th respondent with due priority. Accordingly, the petitioners seek direction to the 5th respondent to consider the petitioners' claim and take appropriate action on Ext. P3 representation.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government Pleader.

(3.) Sri. Cibi Thomas, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that, before the initiation of the proceedings under Ss. 71 and 72 of the Act, some of the petitioners had approached this Court with a prayer to direct the 4th respondent Society to pay the amounts due to them by way of salary, pension, DCRG, Provident Fund etc., and this Court by Ext. P1 judgment directed the Society to take into account its liabilities towards the petitioners giving the statutory preference that they are otherwise entitled to, and the 5th respondent is bound to follow the directions contained therein.