PAVITHRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is one of the members elected to the committee of management of the 4th respondent, the Cannanore Cooperative Urban Bank, Cannanore, at the election which took place on 26 6 1977 for the years 1977 1980. The 1st respondent is the State of Kerala, the 2nd respondent the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Trivandrum, 3rd respondent the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Cannanore, 5th respondent the President of the 4th respondent Bank, 6th respondent the Vice President of the 4th respondent Bank, and respondents 7 to 9 the members nominated to the committee of management of the 4th respondent Bank by the 3rd respondent. In this writ petition the challenge is directed against the nomination of respondents 7 to 9 to the committee of management of the 4th respondent Bank.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the nomination of respondents 7 to 9 to the committee amounts to an act done in violation of the provisions contained in sub-s.(1) of S.28 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969, hereinafter referred to as the Act, which reads as follows:-

(3.) There is also a prayer in the writ petition (Prayer C) that the members nominated to the committee should not be permitted to participate in the election to the office of the President of the Bank. R.37(2) of the Rules, which was noticed earlier, makes it clear that the powers, duties, functions and responsibilities of a person nominated to the committee under S.31 or under the bye laws of a society by any authority shall be the same as those of a member duly elected under the bye laws. The provisions contained in R.38 in regard to the election of the President does not give any indication that members nominated to the committee would not be entitled to participate in the election of the President. It may also be noticed that under sub-s.(3) of S 31 it is made clear that a person nominated to the committee of a society under sub-s.(1) shall not take part in the discussion of any no confidence motion or vote on any such motion. Impliedly this shows that they have a right to participate in the election of the President and the bar is only to the participation in the discussion of any no confidence motion and on voting on any such motion. The contention that nominated members of the committee are not entitled to exercise vote in the election of the President also cannot be upheld.