A branch manager challenged recovery of alleged excess pay based on an order that passed a promotion to a senior clerk. The Court found the underlying Government orders were undisputed and thus declined to interfere.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/20TH KARTHIKA, 1937
WP(C).NO. 17678 OF 2012 (H)
PETITIONER:
------------
ABDUL SALAM C, BRANCH MANAGER, VALAVANNUR, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, VALAVANNUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.SASINDRAN
SRI.V.VENUGOPAL
SRI.S.SHYAM KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE VALAVANNUR SERVICE C0-OPERATIVE BANK, VALAVANNUR, MALAPPURAM-676505, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MALAPPURAM-676 505.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. SRI. C.K. JAYAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).NO. 17678 OF 2012 (H)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.7.2012 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT SOCIETY TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF ALLEGED EXCESS PAY.
EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.6.2012 ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT OF THE YEAR 2008-2009 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE SPECIAL GRADE INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR MALAPPURAM.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT R1(A): | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.02.2000 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT R1(B): | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.9.2002 PASSED BY THE JOINT SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. |
| EXHIBIT R1(C): | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN R.P.NO: 432/2008 IN O.P. NO: 12622/2003. |
| EXHIBIT R1(D): | TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 12.8.2014. |
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
DST
K. HARILAL, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P. (C) No.17678 of 2012
- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of November, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The Petitioner is at present working as Branch Manager in the service of the 1st respondent Bank. While, working as Senior Clerk, he was promoted as 'Accountant' on 15.10.1998 and paid salary of the Accountant from 01.06.1999 only. The promotion was granted consequent on the promotion of Sri. A.P. Moideenkutty and Smt. Ramla, from the post of Accountant to Branch Managers in the year 2001. Now, the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P1 decision taken by the 1st respondent bank, directing to recover the amount, which the petitioner has received, while working as Accountant, in implementation of Ext.P2 order, passed by the 2nd respondent stating the promotion of Sri. A.P. Moideenkutty and Smt. Ramla,
W.P.(C) No. 17678 of 2012
-: 2 :-
from the post of Accountant to Branch Manager was illegal and unsustainable. Hence, this Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers.
affidavit, stating that Ext.P1 decision has been taken in implementation of Ext.P2 order, passed by the 2nd respondent, to recover the amount from the petitioner and the 2nd respondent has already passed Ext.R1(a)
W.P.(C) No. 17678 of 2012
-: 3 :-
stating that the petitioner was not entitled to get the salary of the Accountant from 01.06.1999 onwards, as their promotion to the post of Accountant was made consequent and the vacancy arose a wrong promotion of Smt. Ramla and Sri. A.P. Moideenkutty, from the post of Accountant to Branch Managers. Actually, Smt. Ramla and Sri. A.P. Moideenkutty were not qualified to be promoted as Branch Managers and without noticing their disqualification, the Board of Directors promoted them to the post of Branch Managers and thereby the post of Accountant, to which the petitioner was promoted, was a post left vacant erroneously, against the Rules. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get salary of Accountant to which he was erroneously promoted posted, by mistake. Ext.R1(a) order, passed by the 2nd respondent was challenged before the Government and the Government, after affording an opportunity of being
W.P.(C) No. 17678 of 2012
-: 4 :-
heard to the petitioner passed Ext.R1(b) order, affirming
the findings of the 2nd respondent, in Ext.R1(a) order. These orders are the basic orders, from which Ext.P2 order has arisen and the basic orders, under which Ext.P2 order has been passed are not challenged in this Writ Petition. Put it differently, Exts.P1 and P2 are passed in implementation of Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) orders.
W.P.(C) No. 17678 of 2012
-: 5 :-
that so long as Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) are not challenged or sought to be set aside in this Writ Petition, this Court cannot prevent the implementation of Ext.P1 decision and P2 order, invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this Court decline jurisdiction to the petitioner. It is left open to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies as proved under law.
This Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- K. HARILAL,
JUDGE
DST
//True copy//
P.A. To Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can quash the recovery order when the Government orders upon which it is based are not challenged.
Whether the Court should entertain the writ petition to set aside the recovery decision.
Whether the Court can declare the petitioner entitled to salary for the posts he held.
Abdul Salam C
The Valavannur Service Co-operative Bank
The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General)
K. Harilal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
