High Court of KeralaWP(C)/29121/2015disposed of

N.Ramakrishnan v. The Director, Diary Development Department

2015-12-18Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 29121 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER : - ---------------------- N.RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O NARAYANA PANIKAR, MURUGAVILASM BANGLOW, ARAYOOR DESAM, CHENKAL VILLAGE, POORANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADVS.SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.K.AKHIL RESPONDENTS : - --------------------------

1. THE DIRECTOR, DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695004.

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695004.

3. THE DIARY EXTENSION OFFICER, DIARY EXTENSION OFFICE, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695 502.

4. THE PORANNOOR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.T.179 (D) APCOS, THOTTINKARA, PLAMUTTUKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695122 R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.V.PREMAKUMARAN NAIR R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP BY GOVERNMENT PLEADERSRI. G. GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 29121 of 2015 (M) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : - ------------------------------------- EXHIBTI P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.8.2015 SUBMITTED TO THE RSPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ON 22/8/15.

EXHIBTI P1(a): TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : - NIL.

--------------------------------------- // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/-

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 29121 of 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of December, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, said to be a founder member of the fourth respondent Co-operative Society, has the following grievances:

(1) That the Society has admitted certain members who have not been qualified. In other words, those members have not been qualified because they do not reside within the area of the Society or, in the alternative, they do not possess any property within the jurisdiction of the Society;

(2) That the Society despite being in financial constraints has decided to appoint one more permanent employee, which is against the interest of the institution.

2. Contending that the second respondent has so far not disposed of his representation, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent has submitted that insofar as the second issue is concerned, it is in the realm of service dispute and is amenable to adjudicatory

W.P.(c) No. 29121 of 2015 jurisdiction of the Arbitrator under Section 69 of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act. Insofar as the first issue is concerned, he submits that the second respondent has already delegated the issue to the third respondent, who has already issued a notice to the members concerned calling for their objections. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the second or third respondent, as the case may be, to consider Exhibit P1 representation excluding the issue of service dispute and pass appropriate orders thereon, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No order as to costs.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-