P. KRISHNAN Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the issue involved in both these writ petitions is the same they are taken up for consideration together and disposed by this common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 2783 of 2012 were members of the Standing Committee of the 3rd respondent Council during the year 2007. Petitioners 1 to 5 continued as Standing Committee members of the 3rd respondent Council even thereafter, pursuant to the election that was conducted in 2010. In the writ petition, they are aggrieved by Ext. P16 order dated 28.01.2012, by which they were ousted from the membership of the 3rd respondent Council. The brief facts leading up to Ext. P16 order are as follows:

(3.) W .P.(C). No. 10737 of 2012 was filed at a stage when, after Ext. P16 order in W.P.(C). No. 2783 of 2012 was passed and the petitioners in that writ petition had been found disqualified from membership of the 3rd respondent Council, an interim order was passed by this Court on 27.03.2012, on consent of all parties, directing that a General Body Meeting of the 3rd respondent Council be convened for considering the question of disqualification of the petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 2783 of 2012 since it was felt that the General Body is the ultimate authority to take a final decision in the matter. This Court then proceeded to confer the authority to issue notices for convening the General Body Meeting on the Director of Social Welfare Department. It was made clear that if the General Body adopted a resolution holding the petitioners as liable to be disqualified then the disqualification would stand, if on the other hand General Body adopted a resolution that the petitioners are not liable to be disqualified, they would continue as members of the 3rd respondent Council untrammelled by Ext. P15 order. The District Collector was also put in charge of the day to day affairs of the establishment, pending the taking of a final decision in the matter by the General Body, as directed in the interim order. It would appear that when steps were taken to convene the General Body Meeting, as directed by this Court in the interim order referred to above, it was noticed that in connection with the General Body Meeting, notice was issued to 1742 persons as against the 890 life members who, according to the petitioner were the only life members of the 3rd respondent Council at the time they were ousted from membership by Ext. P16 order. The petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 10737 of 2012 therefore approached this Court challenging the order dated 28.01.2012, that was impugned as Ext. P16 in other writ petition, as also seeking a direction to the respondents to limit the participation in the General Body Meeting, scheduled pursuant to the directions from this Court, to only those 890 members in respect of whom there was no dispute with regard to their life membership in the 3rd respondent Council. In the said writ petition, there are definite allegations regarding the manipulation and falsification of the membership registers and in that connection, a declaration is sought to the effect that those persons who were admitted subsequent to 04.08.2011 by fabrication, manipulation and falsification of records and who were assigned membership numbers from 891 onwards are not entitled to participate in the General Body Meeting scheduled. Thus in essence the grievance of the petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 10737 of 2012 is with regard to the admission of 868 persons as life members of the 3rd respondent Council and the consequent exercise by the said person of their rights as members of the 3rd respondent Council.