to grant sanction as study leave is Government and therefore, the petitioner has no ground to say that they have legally granted permission 2nd respondent. This argument has no merit. Admittedly, the 2nd respondent is an employee of Co-operative Society, KSR would apply where ever it is not provided under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act or Rules. Further reference in the counter affidavit that Registrar of Co-operative Societies have issued a circular No.37/84, clarifying that only such Peon or attenders who have got three years continuous service alone can be considered for promotion do not indicate period of permissible leave has to be excluded. Admittedly, the 2nd respondent had a total period of two years and two months of service. This Circular in fact has to be read in the context of statutory rules. The statutory rules as quoted above clearly indicate that the Leave Without Allowance also can be reckoned for the purpose of reckoning qualifying service for promotion. Therefore, I am of the view that stand taken by the Joint Registrar in Ext.P8 is unsustainable. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that the petitioner bank has no locus standi to espouse the cause of 2nd respondent employee. It is to be noted that it is the decision of the petitioner bank has been
