Hareesh C vs Pantheerankavu Service ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7547 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 20573 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

           HAREESH C
           AGED 35 YEARS
           S/O KRISHNANKUTTY, RESIDING AT CHANDANARI HOUSE,
           KODALNADAKKAVU, PANTHEERANKAVU, NIGHT WATCHMAN,
           PANTHEERANKAVU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.
           2110, PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE - 673 019
           BY ADV MARIYAM JACOB


RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE PANTHEERANKAVU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
           NO.2110 PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE - 673 019,
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
    2      THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PANTHEERANKAVU SERVICE
           CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. 2110,
           PANTHEERANKAVU, KOZHIKODE- 673 019, REPRESENTED BY
           ITS PRESIDENT.
    3      THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G),
           KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-
           OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE - 673
           004.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                       2



W.P.(C)No. 20573 of 2022.




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022.

The petitioner says that he is working as peon in the

services of the 1st respondent - Pantheerankavu Service

Co-operative Bank Ltd, and that, though he possess all

qualifications for being promoted, the same is being

refused by the said Bank and are attempting to fill up the

available post through direct recruitment. He says that

he has, therefore, preferred Ext.P1 representation before

the 2nd respondent - Board Directors of the Bank and

alleges that since no action was taken thereon, he has

been constrained to prefer Ext.P3 before the 3rd

respondent - Joint Registrar. He thus, prays that the said

Authority be directed to take up Ext.P3 and dispose it of

in terms law.

W.P.(C)No. 20573 of 2022.

2. I have heard Smt.Mariyam Jacob - learned

counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Parvathy K. - learned

Government Pleader, appearing for the 3 rd respondent. I

do not propose to issue notice to respondents 1 and 2, in

view of the directions that I propose in this judgment.

3. As seen above, the specific case of the

petitioner is hat he is being denied his promotion and

that the Bank is trying to fill up the available vacancy

through direct recruitment. Obviously, therefore, the

Joint Registrar cannot involve in this matter at this time;

and hence I cannot direct Ext.P3 to be disposed of.

4. However, I notice that the petitioner has

approached the 2nd respondent through Ext.P1

representation and certainly, the said Authority must

consider the same and take a decision thereon, before

proceeding further with the action for direct recruitment,

W.P.(C)No. 20573 of 2022.

so that, based on the decision therein, the petitioner can

invoke other statutory remedies, including under Section

69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, if so

warranted.

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the

2nd respondent to take up Ext.P1 representation of the

petitioner and dispose it of, after hearing him, as also

any other person who may be interested; thus

culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action

thereon, as expeditiously as is possible.

Until such time as the afore exercise is completed

and the resultant order communicated to the petitioner,

the vacancy, if still available, shall not be filled up.

Needless to say, if Ext.P2 has already been disposed

of by the 2nd respondent, then they will furnish a copy of

the order therein to the petitioner through Registered

W.P.(C)No. 20573 of 2022.

Post acknowledgment due, in the address in this writ

petition, with in a period of two weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment, so that he can then

invoke his other remedies as are available to him.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

Raj/24.06.2022.

W.P.(C)No. 20573 of 2022.

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20573/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.5.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 &

Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE FEEDER CATEGORY RULE APPLICABLE TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.5.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT