IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
BINCYMOL P.A., SENIOR CLERK (UNDER ORDER OF
SUSPENSION), MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, MANEED
P.O, PIRAVOM 686 664, RESIDING AT KUNNATHUKALAPPURAYIL,
MANEED P.O, PIRAVOM - 686 664
BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY, MANEED P.O, PIRAVOM 686 664
2 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
BANK, MANEED P.O, PIRAVOM 686 664
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
3 SRI.BIJU VARGHESE, CHAIRMAN, DISCIPLINARY SUB
COMMITTEE, MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, MANEED
P.O, PIRAVOM 686 664
4 P.SHARANGADHARAN, DOMESTIC ENQUIRY OFFICER,
MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, MANEED P.O,
PIRAVOM - 686 664
SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.07.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).23134/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 23134 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.E 59,
MANEED.P.O., PIRAVOM, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY.
SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR
SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN
SRI.HARISANKAR N UNNI
SMT.N.S.SHAMILA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES (GENERAL), CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM- 682 030.
2 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
(G), MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM- 686 661.
3 BINCYMOL P.A., SENIOR CLERK (UNDER ORDER OF
SUSPENSION), MANEED SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,
MANEED.P.O., PIRAVOM, RESIDING AT
KUNNATHUKALAPPURAYIL, MANEED P.O.,
PIRAVOM, PIN- 686 664.
BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN
SMT.PARVATHY K - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 27.07.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).29403/2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case
3
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.29403/2021, 23134/2022] Among the afore two writ petitions - which have been heard together on account of the analogous facts and circumstances presented therein - WP(C) No.29403/2021 has been filed by Smt.Bincymol, who is working as a Senior Clerk in the Maneed Service Co-operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "Bank" for short); while WP(C)No.23134/2022 has been filed by the said Bank.
2. Smt.Bincymol was placed under suspension by the Bank on the basis of certain imputations and she challenges the same, producing it as Ext.P1 in WP(C)No.29403/2021, along with a further notice issued by the Bank on 03.08.2021, marked as Ext.P2, containing the Memorandum of Charges against her.
3. The specific case of Smt.Bincymol is that, both the afore proceedings are incompetent since they have been issued by the President of the Society, thus being in blatant violation of the declarations of law by a learned Division Bench of this Court in Kodanchery Service Co-operative Bank Ltd & Others v.Joshy Varghese & Others (2020 KHC 5394). WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 4
4. While so, on the allegation that the competent statutory Authority is refusing permission to the Bank to extend the suspension of Smt.Bincymol, they have approached this Court through W.P.(C) No.23134/2022.
5. I have heard Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar, learned counsel for the Bank; Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel for Smt.Bincymol A. and Smt.Parvathy K., learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.
6. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan vehemently argued that both Exts.P1 and P2 order of suspension and Charge Memo respectively in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021 issued by the Bank are untenable and without forensic support because they have been issued by its President. He thus prayed that W.P.(C) No.29403/2021 be allowed and W.P.(C) No.23134/2022 be dismissed.
7. In response, Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar, learned standing counsel for the Bank, submitted that though the aforementioned suspension order and charge memo have been signed by the President of the Society, it has been issued under the authority of the Managing Committee of the Bank and as per specific instructions from them. In other words, his case is that, though the impugned orders show that it has been issued WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 5 by the President, it must be construed that he has done so on behalf of the Managing Committee under their dictate, and without any individual contribution having been made by him.
8. On hearing Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar on the afore lines on an earlier occasion, I directed him to produce on record the originals of the Minutes Book of the Managing Committee of the Society and he has made the same available across the Bar for the inspection of this Court. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned counsel for Smt.Binchmol has also gone through the said document in Court.
9. When one examines the Minutes Book - copies of which have also been produced by the Bank as Exts.R1(k) series along with their counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021, which is certainly the same as the original made available to this Court - it is evident that the Managing Committee took a decision both to suspend Smt.Bincymol and to serve upon her a charge memo. The minutes also contain that the specifics of the Charge Memo; and therefore, the question is whether the President has acted on his own, or merely subscribed his signature to the proceedings of the Managing Committee.
10. I am afraid that I cannot find favour with Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar in this regard because, even on an ex WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 6 facie examination of Exts.P1 and P2 in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021, it becomes incontestable that both of them start with the heading "Proceedings of the President of the Maneed Service Co-operative Bank Ltd". They are signed by the said Authority, though he says that the same are being issued under the authority of the Managing Committee. The Minutes Book of the Managing Committee of the Society - both the copy and the original - render it inescapable that the said Committee certainly took a decision to suspend Smt.Bincymol, but they authorised the President to issue appropriate orders. Similarly, in the case of the Charge Memo, the Managing Committee has recorded in their minutes the details of the charge to be issued to her, but then again authorised the President to issue an appropriate order. I certainly travel with the explanation of Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar that Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021 contains exactly the Charges as had been proposed by the Managing Committee in their minutes.
11. However, the question is whether this is sufficient.
12. The law is well settled by this Court, including in Joshy Varghese (supra), that the power to suspend an employee or issue charge memo is vested with the Managing Committee. It is not sufficient that they take a decision and WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 7 authorise somebody to act on their behalf. This is because they cannot delegate that power, which is statutorily vested in them.
13. Hence, when the Managing Committee could not have delegated their powers to the President, the acme question is whether the orders issued by him can obtain the imprimatur of this Court. The answer to this certainly has to be to the negative, because whatever be the explanation that Sri.B.S.Swathi Kumar may offer, it is clear that Exts.P1 and P2 in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021 has been issued by the President. Whether he did so as authorised by the Managing Committee or otherwise is irrelevant for the reasons that I have already recorded above, particularly when he concedes that the same were issued by him, though under the dictation of the said Committee.
14. In the afore circumstances, I have no doubt that Smt.Bincymol is entitled to succeed; and consequently that the Bank cannot seek any permission for extension of her order of suspension, namely Ext.P1 in W.P.(C) No.29403/2021.
Resultantly, I allow W.P.(C) No.29403/2021 and quash Exts.P1 and P2; however, leaving full liberty to the Bank to initiate fresh action against Smt.Bincymol in terms of law, after following due procedure.
WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 8 As a consequence W.P.(C) No.23134/2022 is dismissed as having become without any further purpose.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23134/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.101/2021(1) DATED 28-7-2021 OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.VII DATED 6-
6-2022 OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13-6-2022.
WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 10 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29403/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 28-
07-2021 Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P1 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 3-08-2021 ALONG WITH THE MEMO OF CHARGES Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P2 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 9-08-2021 Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16-08-2021 Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY DATED 20-08-2021 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DISCIPLINARY SUB COMMITTEE DATED 25-08-2021 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DISCIPLINARY SUB COMMITTEE DATED 27-08-2021 Exhibit P7A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P7 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEFENSE DATED 1-09-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CONVENER OF THE DISCIPLINARY SUB COMMITTEE WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 11 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10-09-2021 ISSUED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P9 Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 17/6/2022 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO. X DATED 25-6-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 B TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO:101/2021(1) DATED 6/7/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 C TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO. II DATED 28-7-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 D TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE RESOLUTION NO. XVII DATED 30-7-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 E TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 5-8-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit R1 F TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 6-
8-2021 SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER GIVING THE DETAILS OF THE DOCUMENTS Exhibit R1 G TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO: IV (1) DATED 16-8-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit R1 H TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO: IV DATED 16-8-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 I TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 1/2021 DATED 19-8-2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit R1 J TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 31.8.2021 GIVING THE WP(C) NO. 29403 OF 2021 & con.case 12 DETAILS OF THE DOCUMENTS PERUSED BY HER. Exhibit R1 K TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO. II DATED 28-7-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R1 L TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE HELD ON 30-7-2021 CONTAINING RESOLUTION NO. XVII Exhibit R1 M TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.763/2021 OF PRIVAOM POLICE STATION DATED 29/7/2021 Exhibit R1 N TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE BYE-LAW OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.