ARVINDAKSHA PANICKER Vs. PERUMBALAM SERVICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three petitioners and respondents 5 to 7 are the members of the Perumbalam Service Cooperative Society Ltd. No. 46, for short the Society. As per the constitution and bye laws of the Society, the management of the Society is vested in a Managing Committee comprising nine members out of whom seven are to be elected from seven wards. The election to the Managing Committee is to be held once in two years. The petitioners as well as respondents 5 to 7 were candidates from Ward Nos. 5 to 7. Aggrieved by the decision of the second respondent the Returning Officer, accepting the nomination of respondents 5 to 7 overruling the objections of the petitioners, and rejecting the nomination of the second petitioner, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination of respondents 5 to 7, and for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to accept the nomination of the second petitioner and to reject the nominations of respondents 5 to 7. Some incidental reliefs also are sought in the petition.

(2.) It is averred in the writ petition that respondents 5 and 7 being persons in default of payment to the Society are not eligible for being elected as members of the committee of the society under S.28 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969, (for short the Act) by virtue of R.44(1)(c)(i) of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Rules, 1969, and that the 6th respondent is not eligible to contest the election to the committee by virtue of clauses (1) (c) (i), (d), (j) and (m) of R.44 of the said Rules, and as such the nominations filed by them ought to have been rejected on these grounds; that the second petitioner's nomination was rejected at 12.45 p. m. on the alleged ground of disparity in the signature of the supporter or the endorser, while the time for objection and scrutiny was to expire at 1 p. m., without leaving practically any time to enable the second petitioner to bring the endorser and prove the genuineness of the signature.

(3.) The first respondent is the Society, represented by its Secretary; the second respondent, as already stated, is the Returning Officer (appointed by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies for conducting the election to the Board of management of the Society); the 3rd respondent is the State of Kerala; and the 4th respondent is the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.