Dismissed

A.K.Aboobacker v. Cochin Refineries Employees Consumer Co-Operative Society LTD.NO.E-226

Kerala HC4 Apr 2017WP(C)/22073/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition but directed the 1st respondent Co-operative Society to sympathetically consider the petitioner's representation regarding post-punishment benefits and pass orders within two weeks, noting earlier orders and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to consider Ext.P9 representation sympathetically and pass orders within two weeks; no writ issued against Ext.P14.

A.K.Aboobacker Vs Cochin Refineries Employees Consumer… — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2017/14TH CHAITHRA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 22073 of 2015 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

A.K.ABOOBACKER, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.LATE KUNJUMOHAMMED, ELAMANA HOUSE, MANAKKAPPADY, ASOKAPURAM P.O, PIN - 683 101, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.NOBLE MATHEW

¶9

SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. COCHIN REFINERIES EMPLOYEES CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.E-226, AMBALAMUGAL, ERNAKULAM - 682 302, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

2. THE PRESIDENT, MANAGING COMMITTEE, COCHIN REFINERIES EMPLOYEES CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.E-226 AMBALAMUGAL, ERNAKULAM- 682 302.

¶13

3. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT, COCHIN REFINERIES EMPLOYEES CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.E-226 AMBALAMUGAL, ERNAKULAM 682 302, REP. BY PRESIDENT.

¶14

4. JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OFFICE OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 030.

¶15

R1 TO R3 BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

¶16

SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS

¶17

R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-04-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

mbr/

¶20

WP(C).No. 22073 of 2015 (H)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXHIBIT	P1.	COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 31.7.04.
EXHIBIT	P2.	COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P3.	COPY OF THE PAY SLIP FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 2007.
EXHIBIT	P4.	COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 16.7.07 IMPOSING PUNISHMENT OF DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE.
EXHIBIT	P5.	COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 17.7.07.
EXHIBIT	P6.	COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.7.07.
EXHIBIT	P7.	COPY OF THE AWARD OF THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT	P8.	COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 1.8.13.
EXHIBIT	P9.	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.11.13.
EXHIBIT	P10.	PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE AUDIT NOTE.
EXHIBIT	P11.	PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT	P12.	PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO.4 BY THE ASST. REGISTRAR GENERAL TO THE PETITIONER ON 3.6.2014.
EXHIBIT	P13.	PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC 1704/2014 DATED 26.2.14.
EXHIBIT	P14.	PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER DISMISSING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.5.15.
EXHIBIT	P15.	COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 9.8.2007 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPOND	ENTS'	EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶28

W.P. (C) No.22073 OF 2015

¶29

Dated this the 4^th day of April, 2017.

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

Prayers raised in this writ petition are as follows:

¶32

i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P14 and quash the same.

¶33

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent No.3 to release the balance salary from July 2007 onwards considering the salary drawn by him in June 2007, forthwith.

¶34

iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to fix the scale of pay of the petitioner untrammeled by the punishment imposed by Ext.P5 and upheld in Ext.P14 by respondent No.3.

¶35

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the relief pressed is only for consideration of the benefit promised to the petitioner by the third paragraph of Ext.P5 order issued by the 1^st respondent-society on 17.07.2007. It is submitted that at the time of imposing punishment, the petitioner was drawing a total salary

¶36

W.P.(C) No.22073/2015 2

¶37

of Rs.17,673/- and his basic pay was Rs.8,849/-. He was placed lowest in the pay scale of the present grade and his basic pay was reduced to Rs.4,000/- by Ext.P5. Ext.P5 specifically states that the petitioner's performance will be evaluated in the coming six months and if found satisfactory, the respondents would further consider reduction in the gravity of punishment. The petitioner contends that thereafter, he was granted promotion on 01.08.2013 and that Ext.P8 order would make it perfectly clear that the petitioner's services were satisfactory and that there was no reason to deny the benefit as has been held out in Ext.P5 to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is due to retire from service on 31.05.2017.

¶38

Learned counsel for the 1^st respondent would submit that Ext.P9 representation preferred by the petitioner as also his request for benefit of last part of Ext.P5 order will be considered by the 1^st respondent-society without any further delay and positively within a period of two weeks.

¶39

In the above view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P9 representation preferred by the petitioner sympathetically and

¶40

W.P.(C) No.22073/2015

¶41

¶42

pass orders thereon, taking note of Ext.P8 and also in view of

¶43

the condition contained in paragraph 3 of Ext.P5 order. Orders

¶44

as directed above shall be passed by the 1^st respondent within

¶45

a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶48

smp

A.K.Aboobacker v. Cochin Refineries Employees Consumer Co-Operative Society LTD.NO.E-226

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.K.Aboobacker v. Cochin Refineries Employees Consumer Co-Operative Society LTD.NO.E-226

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

Chenthamarakshan Vs the District Collector

Dr.Mohammed Anwar Vs Thendath Mohammed Haji and Others

Radhaklrishnan N. Vs the Managing Director, Kerala State Tour

C.A. Alophonsa Vs State of Kerala

Kalliyoor Grama Panchayat Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Durolac Vs State of Kerala