The writ petition is filed against a notice issued by the Kerala Co-operative Ombudsman seen at Ext.P5, alleging that the Ombudsman has absolutely no jurisdiction to issue such notice. The learned Counsel would point to sub-clause (C) of 7(2) of the Kerla Co-operative Ombudsman Scheme, 2010 introduced by the Government of Kerala, which interdicts any compliant on the same subject matter of an application under Sections 69, 70 and 82 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for brevity, 'the KCS Act'). In the present case, admittedly, the Bank has approached the Arbitrator under Section 69 and obtained an award produced at Ext.P1. The said contention is prima facie acceptable. 2. The petitioner however, contends that the dispute is with respect to the interest charged. The petitioner's W.P.(C) No.28251 of 2012 - F 2 complaint is that, he had been compelled to give amounts as per the award and he had claimed for a refund. In fact, if the petitioner had any dispute with respect to the award amounts, the petitioner ought to have approached the Tribunal with an appeal. No appeal having been filed. This Court is of the opinion that, the proceedings filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. However, in the interest of proprietary, it is only proper that the petitioner Bank can approach and place it before the Ombudsman.
With the above observations, the writ petition is allowed.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB