Kerala High Court
Nijil.R vs Thikkody Service Co-Operative ... on 8 July, 2021
WA No.785/2021 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
Thursday, the 8th day of July 2021 / 17th Ashadha, 1943
WA NO. 785 OF 2021
Against Judgment dated 25.3.2021 in WP(C) 20954/2020 of this Court
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WP(C) 20954/2020:
NIJIL R., AMBADI,CHINGAPURAM,THIKKODY,QUILANDI, KOZHIKODE.
BY ADVS.M/S.P.P.JACOB & MARIYAM JACOB
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WP(C) 20954/2020:
1. THIKKODY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.D. 1950, THIKKODY,
QUILANDI, KOZHIKODE-673305, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE THIKKODY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LIMITED NO.D 1950, THIKKODY, QUILANDI, KOZHIKODE-673305, REPRESENTED
BY ITS PRESIDENT.
3. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KOZHIKODE,
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
QUILANDI, KOZHIKODE-673305.
4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KOZHIKODE. OFFICE
OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PUTHIYARA,
KOZHIKODE-673004.
BY ADV.SRI.B.S.SWATHIKUMAR FOR R1 AND SHRI SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,
SR. GOVT. PLEADER FOR R-4
Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum the High Court be pleased to
prohibit the respondents 1 & 2 from completing/finalzing the selection
process pursuant to Ext.P2 notification pending disposal of the above
appeal.
This Writ Appeal coming on for orders on 08.07.2021, upon perusing
the appeal memorandum, the court on the same day passed the following:-
WA No.785/2021 2/4
EXT.P-2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA
DAILY DATED 25.07.2019 INVITING APPLICATION.
EXT.P5:TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FEEDER CATEGORY RULE APPROVED BY FOURTH
RESONDENT DATED 31.5.2006 WITH TYPED COPY.
EXT.P8: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR DATED
18.1.2020.
ANNEXURE R1(B): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CRP(2) 4104/14 K.DIS DATED
5.10.2016 AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
WA No.785/2021 3/4
ALEXANDER THOMAS & A. BADHARUDEEN, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.A. No.785 of 2021
[Arising out of judgment dated 25.03.2021 in W.P.(C) No.20954/2020]
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 08th day of July, 2021
ORDER
Sri.P.P. Jacob, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
would specifically urge that as a matter of fact, Ext.P5 is the Feeder
Category Rules framed in respect of the 1st respondent Service Co-
operative Bank, for regulating the promotion of the in-service
incumbents and that the fact finding made by the 4 th respondent-
Joint Registrar in Ext.P8 that promotions made in the Society are
irregular due to absence of Feeder Category Rules and that it is for
the 1st respondent-Society to proceed for getting Feeder Category
Rules approved, etc. are untenable, etc.
2. Per contra, Sri.B.S. Swathikumar, learned counsel
appearing for the 1st respondent Co-operative Society would contend
on the basis of averments in the counter affidavit dated 06.03.2021,
filed in the W.P.(C) that Ext.P5 were the approved Feeder Category
Rules for the Society at the time it was classified as a Class-III
Society and later the 1st respondent has been re-classified as a Class-
IV Society as per Anx.R1(b) proceedings dated 05.10.2016 and
thereafter no approved Feeder Category Rules are in existence as far
WA No.785/2021 4/4
as the re-classified Society as a Class-IV Society, etc.
3. Accordingly, Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, the learned Senior
Government Pleader will get specific instructions from the 4 th
respondent-Joint Registrar, as to the factual correctness of the
abovesaid rival pleas of the petitioner on the one hand and the 1 st
respondent Society on the other hand.
4. However, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant would point out that in any view of the matter the 4 th
respondent-Joint Registrar has clearly held in Ext.P8 order that
resort to the method of direct recruitment for the post in question is
not legally correct and that the 1 st respondent has not challenged the
said findings.
5. If that be so, it is ordered that further steps for direct
recruitment to the post in question as per Ext.P2 will be kept in
abeyance.
List on 30.07.2021.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN,
JUDGE
Skk//12072021
08-07-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
