Kerala High Court
M.S. Vimal Kumar vs The Joint Registrar Of Co-Operative ... on 5 June, 2024
WPC 16086/24
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 16086 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
M.S. VIMAL KUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS S/O MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, SREE
BHAGAVATHY MANDIRAM, KOOTAYANIMOODU, VELLANAD P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695543
BY ADVS. T.I.UNNIRAJA S.G.SREEKANTH S.BADUSHA FAHEEM AHSAN.S
VAIDERSH H.S. R.S.VISRUTH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL),
OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
2 VELLANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 2379 REPRESENTED
BY SECRETARY, VELLANAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695543
3 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, VELLANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LTD. NO. 2379 VELLANAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695543
4 THE PRESIDENT, VELLANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.
2379 VELLANAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695543
5 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR'S OFFICE,
REVENUE TOWER, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
OTHER PRESENT:
GP SMT ANIMA M
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 16086/24
2
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 5th day of June 2024)
The petitioner applied for the post of Night Watcher in
the 1st respondent Society vide notification No.1/2019. The
petitioner submits that the 4th respondent had asked him Rs.4
lakhs to be paid for selecting him for the said post in the 1st
respondent society. He raised the money from his family
members and paid it to the 4th respondent in 2020. Even
thereafter, the 4th respondent postponed the selection process
and a complaint was filed by the petitioner before the Kerala
Pradesh Congress Committee, who had intervened in the
matter, and as a result, the petitioner received the money
back from the 4th respondent.
2. It is also the case of the petitioner that the 4th
respondent had obtained Rs.12 lakhs from other candidate to
the same post. Oral complaint was raised before the 5th
respondent, but no written complaint was accepted.
Thereafter, the petitioner filed A.R.C. No.15/2022
challenging the selection process for the vacant post of Night
watcher in the bank and an interim order was passed by the
Arbitration court staying all the selection process. The
Managing Committee, along with the Bank, filed W.P.(C)
No.13990 of 2022 before this court, and an interim stay was
obtained against the operation of the order passed by the
Arbitration court in I.A. No.1 of 2022, staying the selection
process. It was also made clear that the Bank is free to go
with the selection process pursuant to the notification and
conduct examination and interview, but the appointment
shall be made only after obtaining further orders from this
court. The examination and interview were conducted, and
Ext.P5 minutes were drawn by which a rank list was brought
into force.
3. In the meanwhile, W.P.(C) No.13990 of 2022, filed
by the Managing Committee was disposed by Ext.P6
directing the Arbitration court to take up the application
preferred by the petitioner against the order in I.A. No.1 of
2022 in ARC No.15 of 2022, regarding the maintainability
of the ARC and to dispose of the same within 6 weeks. The
Arbitration Court took up the maintainability issue and an
order was passed as Ext.P7 holding that the Arbitration case
is maintainable. The petitioner, in the meanwhile, filed
Ext.P8 complaint under Rule 176 of the Kerala Co-operative
Society Rules before the 1st respondent and the petitioner
approached this court by filing W.P.(C) No.28216 of 2023.
The order of the Arbitration court regarding the
maintainability was also challenged by the bank before this
court in W.P.(C) No.1064 of 2023. This court, by a common
judgment dated 17.10.2023, disposed of both the Writ
Petitions quashing the ARC proceedings and directing the 1st
respondent to take up the complaint filed by the petitioner
herein and to pass appropriate orders after hearing him. It
is pursuant to this direction that Ext.P10 notice was issued to
the petitioner to appear on 30.1.2024 at 3 p.m. for a hearing.
4. The counsel for the petitioner submits that on
30.1.2024 the petitioner appeared and the same was
adjourned to 8.2.2024. On 14.2.2024, an argument note, as
Ext.P11 was filed and sought time for adducing evidence.
According to the petitioner, the case was posed on
20.2.2024, 23.3.2024, 6.4.2024 and ultimately on 12.4.2024,
Ext.P14 order was passed rejecting the request of the
petitioner.
5. The counsel for the petitioner argues that though
there were 6 postings, the petitioner was not given an
opportunity to adduce evidence to substantiate the claim
raised in Ext.P8 complaint. If the petitioner had been given
an opportunity to adduce evidence, he could have proved
the allegations raised were true and correct. Therefore, he
prays that Ext.P14 is to be quashed and seeks a direction to
initiate a fresh selection process of vacant posts to be filled
up by the 2nd respondent.
6. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the
Government Pleader.
7. The Government Pleader argues that Ext.P8
complaint was taken into consideration by the 1st respondent
and ample opportunities were given to the petitioner to
substantiate his claim. However, the petitioner failed to
adduce any evidence to prove the allegations in the
complaint. The petitioner filed argument note when case
was posted on 14.2.2024, but the petitioner did not produce
any evidence on that day. It is only to cause delay in the
selection process, that this Writ Petition is filed.
8. Even though notice was issued from this court, the
same was accepted by respondent Nos.2 to 4 and when the
case was posted, none appears for respondent Nos.2 to 4.
8. Ext.P14 is under challenge in this Writ Petition. A
perusal of Ext.P14 shows that on going through the Minutes
and the decisions Nos.1554, 1555, 1556, and 1557, the 1st
respondent is satisfied that the case put forward by the
petitioner in Ext.P8 does not deserve merit and, therefore, it
is dismissed. In the same order, the 1st respondent has stated
that the petitioner has raised a contention that he has paid
Rs.4 lakhs as bribe to the 4th respondent, but he has not
produced any evidence to prove the same. It is a fact that
while dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner, the 1st
respondent has also taken into consideration regarding the
allegations raised against the 4th respondent regarding bribe
and it was left open to be proceeded independently. But the
fact remains that Ext.P14 is passed without any reason and
it is very cryptic. The case of the petitioner that he was not
given an opportunity to adduce evidence is not countered by
the respondents by filing a counter affidavit or a statement.
In such a situation, I am of the firm view that the petitioner
was not given an opportunity to adduce any evidence to
substantiate the allegations in Ext.P8.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, quashing
Ext.P14 order dated 12.4.2024 issued by the 1st respondent,
and the 1st respondent is directed to take up Ext.P8 and
appropriate orders shall be passed, after affording an
opportunity to adduce any evidence and hearing to the
petitioner as well as respondent Nos.2 to 4. Orders shall be
passed within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment.
Till such time, all proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5
Minutes shall stand stayed.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI,
JUDGE
dl/
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16086/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE TWO MEMBER
COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY KPCC DATED 25-09-2021
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT AS WELL AS STAY PETITION
ARC 15/2022 DATED 05/04/2022
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 05/04/2022
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC 13990/2022
DATED 19/04/2022
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 23/05/2022 OF THE
2ND RESPONDENT'S MANAGING COMMITTEE
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22/07/2022 IN WPC
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08/12/2022 IN I.A.
2/2022 IN ARC 15/2022 OF CO-OPERATIVE ARBITRATION
COURT
Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/08/2023
Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 17/10/2023
IN WP(C) 1064/2023 & WP(C) 28216 OF 2023
Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2024
Exhibit P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 14/02/2024
Exhibit P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE DATED 30/01/2024
FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL COVER SENT BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/04/2024
PRONOUNCED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Corrected
