Allowed

S. Sarath v. Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)

Kerala HC13 Jul 2016WP(C)/8568/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the co-operative bank to appoint the petitioners, ranked first and second, as salesmen within two months, holding no extra approval is needed for staffing changes resulting from pre-approved selections.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Second Respondent Bank to implement the selection and appoint the petitioners as salesmen within two months and consider their deployment in fertilizer depots.

S. Sarath Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies… — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2016/22ND ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8568 of 2016 (U)

¶6

PETITIONERS :

¶7

S. SARATH, PARAVILA HOUSE, NEAR MINI STADIUM, POOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-PIN 691 302.

¶8

SREEJITH A.S., JEETH BROTHERS, POOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-PIN 691 302.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN KUM.ANJU CLETUS

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KOLLAM-691 001

¶12

KALAKKODU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.1194, P.O. KALAKKODEU, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM - 691 302, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRTARY.

¶13

R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN SRI.P.E.SAJAL R1 BY ADV. SRI. G. GOPAKUMRA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Skk

¶16

WP(C).No. 8568 of 2016 (U)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION AS PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 13/11/2014 (ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION) EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-12-2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION) EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST (ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION) EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14-12-2015 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION)

¶20

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶21

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶22

SKK

¶23

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶24

W.P.(C)NO.8568 OF 2016

¶25

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2016

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash Ext.P4 and to make appointments to

¶28

the post of salesman from Ext.P3 rank list and for other related reliefs.

¶29

Brief facts for the disposal of the writ petition are thus:-

¶30

Petitioners secured rank No. 1 and 2 evident from Ext.P3 rank list for appointment to the post of salesman in the service of the second respondent bank. The selection pursuant to Ext.P1 was conducted in December 2014. But, further proceedings were stayed by the first respondent in Ext.P2 order based on some complaints about the selection. The first respondent conducted an enquiry and found that there was nothing irregular in the selection process and

¶31

W.P.(C)NO.8568 OF 2016 2

¶32

issued Ext.P4 order vacating the stay. According to the petitioners, appointment to all posts other than salesman has been made. But, in respect of the post of salesman, Ext.P4 stated that the posts are sanctioned in respect of the two shops run by the bank, which are not functioning now and therefore appointment to this post need not be made. That apart, it is also urged that though the textile depot and the home appliances store are not functioning presently, two fertilizer depots are functioning with the support of the daily waged employees. According to the petitioners, the salesman can be effectively deployed in those depots. It is in this background, this writ petition is filed.

¶33

The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit virtually admitting the contentions raised in the writ petition. It is also admitted that in two fertilizer depots daily waged employees are deployed for handling the work there.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader and also the counsel

¶35

W.P.(C)NO.8568 OF 2016 3

¶36

appearing for the second respondent society. The sole question to be decided is, whether petitioners are entitled to be appointed as per Ext.P3 rank list prepared by the second respondent society. So far as the staff pattern is concerned, the petitioners are entitled to get appointment in the second respondent society. The question with respect to the approval of already existing staff pattern, is considered by a Division Bench of this court in [Elampal Service Cooperative Bank Ltd., V Government of Kerala,

¶37

2000 (3) KLT 389] and held that if there is no change of staff pattern consequent to a selection made prior approval of the registrar is not required. Therefore, the same principles applies in this case also. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the second respondent bank to implement the selection made in accordance with Ext.P3 rank list, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The second respondent shall also consider deployment of these petitioners in the fertilizer depots

¶38

¶39

W.P.(C)NO.8568 OF 2016

¶40

in place of daily waged workers.

¶41

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶42

sd/-

¶43

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶44

R.AV

S. Sarath v. Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Sarath v. Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashraf P Vs the Secretary

Dominic Zacharias Vs a.T.James

Monse Mathew Vs Karukachal Rural Co-Operating

K.Baby Vs Ottapalam Block Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd.No.P 608

Mayinkutty Vs the Thalappilly Taluk Primary Co-Operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd. No. 1354

Krishnan Vs Edakode Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. NO.2523