Disposed

Shilly C.J. v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Kerala HC24 May 2022WP(C)/3393/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P.(C) No. 3393 of 2021, the petitioner, a part-time sweeper working full-time, sought regularisation in her post. The High Court directed the respondent Bank to consider her pending petition on merits after a hearing and pass orders within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 on merits after a hearing and pass orders within two months.

Shilly C.J. Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 3393 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V TUESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 3393 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SHILLY C.J. AGED 46 YEARS VENGACHUVATTIL HOUSE,KANIYARAM, MANANTHAWADI P.O., WAYANAD, PART-TIME SWEEPER, THE MANANTHAVADY FARMER'S SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.F.4034, P.B.NO.6, MANANTHAVADY P.O., WAYANAD-670 645.

¶8

BY ADVS. B.S.SWATHI KUMAR SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN SRI.HARISANKAR N UNNI SHRI.SARANGADHARAN P.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), NORTH KALPETTA, WAYANAD-673 122. 2 THE MANANTHAVADY FARMER'S SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.F 4034, P.B.NO.6, MANANTHAVADY P.O., WAYANAD-670 645, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SRI.C.P.SABARI SMT.AMRUTHA SURESH SNEHA JOSEPH SMT SURYA BINOY SR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C) NO. 3393 OF 2021

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner states that she was appointed as Part-Time Sweeper in the 2nd respondent Bank on 01.04.2014 on a consolidated salary of Rs.4,500/-. Though she was designated as a Part-Time Sweeper, she is a fulltime employee who has been entrusted with data entry operations. Her grievance is that her request before the 2nd respondent requesting them to regularise her in the post of Part-Time Sweeper sanctioned as per Ext.P2 is not being considered. Requesting regularisation, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 before the President of the 2nd respondent Bank which is stated to be pending.

¶17

Sri.Swathi Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that for the time being, the petitioner would be satisfied if the 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P3 on its merits and take a decision in an expeditious manner.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the party respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

¶19

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and

¶20

WP(C) NO. 3393 OF 2021

¶21

¶22

circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions:

¶23

a) There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up, consider

¶24

and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised representative.

¶25

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶26

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.

¶27

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

IAP

¶32

WP(C) NO. 3393 OF 2021 4

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3393/2021

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 01.04.2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CRP/2065/16 DATED 18.04.2017 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRESIDENT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.01.2019.

¶37

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶38

NIL

Shilly C.J. v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shilly C.J. v. the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

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

Urmila Gopan Vs T.R.Shamsudheen

Sunil Kumar T. Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Sachin George Vs the Cochin Institute of Science and Technology

Bony Prasad, Vs University of Kerala

Kerala Co-Operative Pensioners Organisation Vs Mohammed Ashraf T.

Ani.S.H, Aged 54 Years, S/O. Harishekesan,K Vs Biju Prabhakar, Aged 55 Yrars, S/O.Prabhakaran