'Society's objective lost': Why Kerala High Court slammed Red Cross
What's the story
The Kerala High Court has voiced its unhappiness with the Ernakulam chapter of the Indian Red Cross Society. It lambasted members for preferring to fight legal battles instead of focusing on their primary objective of serving the public. Chief Justice Nitin M Jamdar and Justice S Manu noted that members seem more concerned about fighting elections for the managing committee than discharging their societal responsibilities.
Judicial concerns
Court's observations on members' priorities
The court observed that protracted litigation is wasting time and resources. "Learned counsel appearing for the District Committee states that negotiations are ongoing. Mediation is still in progress," it said. "There are already five appeals before us. It appears to us that the members of this society have lost sight of the primary objective of the Red Cross Society."
Judicial efficiency
Repeated litigation costs judicial time, says Chief Justice
Chief Justice Jamdar also expressed concern over how continuous litigation was wasting precious time. "Are your members spending their time in the court or are they doing the work of Red Cross? What about the main work? How many matters, how much time courts are spending on this?" it asked. The court said if soon a resolution isn't found, it may appoint an administrator to ensure the objectives of the Red Cross Society are upheld.
Election controversy
Background of the legal disputes
The court's reprimand comes in the wake of a series of appeals concerning the 2022 election for Managing Committee members. Some members of the society alleged current committee members were trying to conduct elections in violation of rules set by the Indian Red Cross Society, New Delhi. Single-judge Justice N Nagaresh had deemed the March 2022 election unconstitutional, going by the rules of the Indian Red Cross Society Act, 1923.
Order
Next hearing on June 2
The judge, in his March 16, 2022 order, had directed that the elections be held by selecting a returning officer, as required by statute. However, members of the (then-existing) managing committee filed the current batch of appeals, disputing the single-judge judgment. The appeals will be heard next on June 2.