Dismissed

K.K.Rathish v. the Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC22 Feb 2012WA/216/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal, the High Court of Kerala dismissed the appeal against a single judge's order denying appointment to the appellant. The judge held that no vacancy existed for the appellant, though noted the society had restricted freedom to appoint on other vacancies in the future.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal was dismissed. The appellant was left at liberty to approach the Court if the society makes any appointment except on the retirement vacancy in the future.

K.K.Rathish Vs the Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/3RD PHALGUNA 1933

¶5

WA.No. 216 of 2012 () IN WPC/13323/2011 ---------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN .NO./ IN WPC.13323/2011 DATED 20-09-2011

¶6

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶7

K.K.RATHISH, KUMBALAM THADATHIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM (N) P.O. PIRAVOM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE MULAKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1097, MULAKULAM NORTH P.O., PIRAVOM, PIN-686 664.

¶11

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

2. THE SECRETARY,

¶13

THE MULAKULAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTDNO.1097,

¶14

MULAKULAM NORTH P.O.

¶15

PIRAVOM, PIN-686 664.

¶16

3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,

¶17

ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 018.

¶18

R3 BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶19

R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.T.A.SHAJI

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

WA.No. 216 of 2012 () IN WPC/13323/2011

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S) ANNEXURES:

¶25

ANNEXURE A1-	COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 6.4.2011 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT FROM THE BANK.
ANNEXURE A2-	COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT REGARDING THE STAFF PATERN IN THE BANK.
ANNEXURE A3-	COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.5.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE BANK.

¶26

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶27

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶28

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES - NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE

C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶33

¶34

BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ.

¶35

W.A. No. 216 OF 2012

¶36

Dated this the 22^nd day of February, 2012

¶37

J U D G M E N T

¶38

Ramachandran Nair, J

¶39

This appellant is a candidate selected for appointment as Attender in the 2^nd respondent, Society. However, only one man was appointed from the select list. While the case of the appellant is that one more post is available for appointment from the same list on account of retirement of one person by name Mathew, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent submitted that Mr. Mathew is not holding a regular post of attender and he was allowed to serve as such on a reversion from a clerical cadre which was pursuant to disciplinary action taken against him. The learned Single Jude accepted the contention of the 2^nd respondent that no more vacancy is there for accommodating the appellant. This is

¶40

W.A. No. 216 OF 2012

¶41

:2 :

¶42

controverted by the appellant by stating that vacancy still exists. However, we do not think that the appellant's claim can be the basis for allowing the Writ Appeal against the dismissal of the Writ Petition. Leaving the freedom to the appellant to approach this Court, if the society makes any appointment except on the retirement vacancy in future, we dismiss the Writ Appeal.

¶43

Sd/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.

¶44

Sd/- BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶45

ul/-

¶46

[True copy]

¶47

P.S. to Judge.

K.K.Rathish v. the Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.K.Rathish v. the Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax,Tvm

Jyothy Laboratories Ltd, Thrissur Vs Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Special Circle, Thrissur

The Manager St.Thomas High School Vs State of Kerala

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Janatha Charitable Society

Khemka Roller Flour Mills P. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S.Su-Kam Power Systems Ltd. Vs State of Kerala