The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of a 2025 amendment introduced by the previous Left Democratic Front (LDF) government, which empowers the general body of a cooperative society to move a no-confidence motion against the managing committee. The amendment was made through the insertion of Rule 43C into the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969.
Ruling by Division Bench
A division bench comprising Justices Anil K Narendran and S Muralee Krishna delivered the ruling on a petition filed by Shaji Mohan, former president of the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. The petitioner had challenged the amendment and also questioned the appointment of an officer as the authorised officer to convene the general body meeting for considering the no-confidence motion against the bank's managing committee.
Referral to Division Bench
During the initial hearing, a single bench observed that the challenge to the constitutional validity of Rule 43C raised a question of law of public importance, warranting consideration by a division bench. Consequently, the legal issue was referred to an appropriate division bench for adjudication.
Petitioner's Contentions
Before the division bench, the petitioner argued that Rule 43C, which enables the general body of a cooperative society to move a no-confidence motion against the managing committee, was unconstitutional, arbitrary, and contrary to the scheme governing elections to the managing committee under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and the Rules.
Court's Observations
Rejecting these contentions, the division bench held that members of a cooperative society's general body have a democratic right to remove a managing committee that has lost their confidence. The court stated that such a mechanism forms part of the democratic control of cooperative societies and does not run contrary to the provisions governing elections under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules.
The court further observed that it is for the legislature and its delegates to decide how the provisions of a statute should be implemented and what measures are necessary to effectively achieve the objectives of the law. It emphasised that the court cannot examine the merits or wisdom of such policy decisions and can only determine whether the rules or regulations fall within the powers granted by the statute.
Final Verdict
Answering the reference, the court held that the impugned amendment, which prescribes the procedure for moving a no-confidence motion under Section 33(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act for the removal of a managing committee by the general body, is neither unconstitutional nor ultra vires the provisions of the Act.
