SHABIN ANTONY Vs. GIREESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts involved in this appeal certainly presents a rather unusual scenario.

(2.) The supersession of a Managing Committee of a Society, ordered by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies invoking the powers under Section 32 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 ('the Act' for brevity), appears to have been set aside, in the judgment impugned herein, on the basis of a subsequent order issued by the competent authorities in surcharge proceedings against the members of the superceded Committee, initiated under Section 68 of the Act, wherein all the allegedly proven irregularities and acts of defiance of the Committee against lawful orders of the authorities were offered post factum ratification and imprimatur. The learned Single Judge, therefore, took the view that since the allegations that led to the supersession have been subsequently ratified, albeit under an independent surcharge proceedings, the order of supersession itself had lost its foundational justification and the said order was consequently quashed.

(3.) The appellant challenges the impugned judgment, inter alia, on the specific assertion that the order of supersession cannot be set aside on the basis of a subsequent order in surcharge proceedings, which according to his contention,is an independent and unconnected proceedings.