Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMITHA A.G., PEECHATTU HOUSE versus THE IDUKKI DISTRICT EX

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SMITHA A.G., PEECHATTU HOUSE v. THE IDUKKI DISTRICT EX-SERVICEMEN - WP(C) No. 10240 of 2007(R) [2007] RD-KL 16030 (18 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 10240 of 2007(R)

1. SMITHA A.G., PEECHATTU HOUSE,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE IDUKKI DISTRICT EX-SERVICEMEN
... Respondent

2. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE IDUKKI

3. DEEPA SHIJU, DAILY WAGE STAFF,

4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BABY

For Respondent :SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

Dated :18/08/2007

O R D E R

K.M.JOSEPH, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C).No. 10240 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 18th day of August, 2007



JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this court seeking to challenge Ext.P1 notification. Petitioner also seeks to declare that first respondent is a credit co-operative society. According to the petitioner first respondent is a credit co-operative society and they are bound to follow the statutory provisions contained in Section 80B of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Under Section 80B the proceeding has to be done by the Kerala Co-operative Service Examination Board. Counter affidavit is filed by the first respondent in which they have produced Exts.R1 A and R1 B. Therein it is specifically stated that the society is a miscellaneous society. According to the respondents the classification has been so done under Rule 15 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules and therefore the contention of the petitioner that the first respondent is a credit co-operative society is without any basis. WPC No.10240/07 2 There is infact no prayer challenging Ext.R1(a) and (b) also. In fact Rule 15 provides that if any question arises as to the classification of the society, it shall be referred to the Registrar for decision and the decision thereon shall be final. The classification has been made under the Rules way back in the year 2001. If that be so, the whole case of the petitioner that the society is a primary credit society is without any basis. In such circumstances, there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)

sv. WPC No.10240/07 3


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.