Manjusha K.P vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 9357 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 3953 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          MANJUSHA K.P., AGED 27 YEARS
          W/O. AAZAD DIN, KULANGARA VAYAL, KAKKODI P.O.,
          KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

          SRI.M.SASINDRAN
          SRI.S.SHYAM KUMAR



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO
          GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    2     STATE CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD,
          KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK BUILDING OVER BRIDGE,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS
          SECRETARY.

    3     THE CALICUT NORTH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,
          KARUVASSERY EAST, KOZHIKODE-673010, REPRESENTED BY ITS
          SECRETARY.

    4     THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
          (GENERAL), KOZHIKODE-673001.

          P.P.JACOB
          MARIYAM JACOB
          PARVATHY K., GP
          S.L.SHYLAJA, SC.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 3953 OF 2021
                               2


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that she has been included as Rank

No.1 in a Rank List prepared by the 2nd respondent - State Co-

operative Service Examination Board ('Board' for short); but

that she has been denied appointment as its Assistant

Secretary by the 3rd respondent - Calicut North Service Co-

operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society' for

short). She, therefore, prays that the Society be directed to

appoint her forthwith to the post of Assistant Secretary.

2. The afore submissions of Sri.M.Sasindran - learned

counsel for the petitioner were, however, controverted by

Sri.P.P.Jacob - learned Standing Counsel for the Society, saying

that the requisition made by his client to the Board, for filling

up the post in question through direct recruitment, was in

error because, after Rule 185(2) of the Kerala Co-operative

Societies Rules ('KCS Rules' for short) was amended with

effect from 28.04.1999, the post of Assistant Secretary can be

filled up only in the ratio of 3:1 between promotees and direct

recruitees. He submitted that there is only one post available

in the cadre of Assistant Secretary in the Society and

therefore, that it cannot be filled up through a direct

recruitment, thus rendering it 100%. He thus prays that this WP(C) NO. 3953 OF 2021

writ petition be dismissed.

3. Sri.Arjun N., learned counsel representing

Smt.Shylaja, learned standing counsel for the "Board",

submitted that his client has only acted as per the requisition

given to them by the Society and that he has no other

comment to make on the claim made by the petitioner.

4. In reply, Sri.M.Sasindran submitted that once the

Society had made a requisition to the "Board", they cannot

resile from it and say that the vacancy cannot be filled up

through direct recruitment. He thus reiteratingly prayed that

this writ petition be allowed.

5. I am afraid that I cannot find favour with the afore

submissions of Sri.M.Sasindran because, whatever be the

action taken by the Society, it is indubitable that it cannot be

approved unless it implicitly confirms with the applicable

statutory scheme. It is without contest that, consequent to the

amendment of Rule 185(2) of the "KCS Rules", the post of

Assistant Secretary cannot be filled up, except in the ratio of

3:1 between promotions and direct recruitments. When it is

without dispute that there is only one post of Assistant

Secretary for the Society, then it cannot be filled up through

direct recruitment and it has to certainly go to a person WP(C) NO. 3953 OF 2021

seeking promotion.

6. In the afore circumstances, though I find empathy for

the petitioner, who have had to go through the entire process

without any purpose, I cannot direct the Society to appoint her

for the reasons above.

Resultantly, I close this writ petition; however, leaving

liberty to the petitioner to invoke any remedy available for any

other claims; and also clarify that if any further vacancy is to

arise in the Bank, she will be entitled to apply for it and to be

selected, subject to her qualifications, de hors these

proceedings.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Mc/stu WP(C) NO. 3953 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3953/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.4/2018 DATED 27.12.2018.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R3E TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.17791/19 DATED 10.07.2019

EXHIBIT R3F A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10.06.2021 SUBMITTED BY EMPLOYEE BINDUSHA

EXHIBIT R3G A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.26 DATED 18.06.2021 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT R3H A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 23.06.2021

EXHIBIT R3I TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2011 (1) KLT SN 76