Kerala High Court
Panathura Purushothaman vs The State Of Kerala on 31 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 7525 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
PANATHURA PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 72 YEARS
S/O SUKUMARAN.B PRESIDENT, PANATHURA COIR VYAVASAYA
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO. 415, PARAVILA,
PACHALLUR P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESIDING AT
"REMYA" , PACHALLUR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN -
695027
BY ADVS.
P.N.MOHANAN
C.P.SABARI
AMRUTHA SURESH
GILROY ROZARIO
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT(COIR),
INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DIRECTORATE OF COIR DEVELOPMENT
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, COIR BHAVAN, PALAYAM,
NANDAVANAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE
COIR MARKETING FEDERATION
LTD,[COIRFED],REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
P.B.NO.4616, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001
4 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING FEDERATION
LTD
[COIRFED], REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
P.B.NO.4616, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. BIMAL K NATH(SR.)- GP, SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN
(SC)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.7525 of 2024
2
M.A ABDUL HAKHIM, J
----------------------
WP(C) No.7525 of 2024
--------------- ------
Dated this the 31st May, 2024
JUDGMENT
1. The grievance of the petitioner is that contractual
employees are appointed in the 4th respondent in
violation of Rule 185A of the Kerala Co-operative
Societies Rules, 1969, without obtaining approval
from the 2nd respondent.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner invited my
attention to Ext.P1 Division Bench judgment of this
Court, in which it is made clear that COIRFED shall
not make temporary appointments hereafter in
violation of the provisions of the Act and Rules. He
also pointed out that Ext.P2 Inspection Report under
Section 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act
in which it is stated that contractual appointments
are made in the 4th respondent without obtaining
prior approval under Rule 185A. The petitioner has
another contention that contractual employment
cannot be given to the retired employees as per the
Rules, but the same is made in the 4 th respondent.
Highlighting of this petitioner has submitted Ext.P3
petition before the 2nd respondent and the petitioner
prays for an early disposal of Ext.P3.
3. The 4th respondent has filed a Counter Affidavit
opposing the prayers in the writ petition. The
Learned Counsel for the 4th respondent invited my
attention to Paragraphs 6 to 8 of the Counter
Affidavit in which it is stated that for selecting
persons for temporary/contract appointments a due
selection process was conducted by the KITCO and
after the process of selection a ranked list was made
available and from that ranked list appointments
were made, so also in the case of Marketing
Manager, a due selection process was conducted by
KITCO; that all these appointments were made after
getting prior approval as required under Rule 185A
of the Rules, from the 2nd respondent; that 14
employees were permitted to continue even after
their retirement and out of which, six persons
mentioned in the Ext.P2 Report has already been
dispensed with and that the post of watcher, sample
collector of fiber are not posts which are earmarked
for PSC and that the defects noted in the Enquiry
Report has already been cured; that with respect to
other posts which are earmarked for appointment
through PSC, the said posts are already reported to
the PSC and in certain cases, the PSC has published
the rank list and appointments were made; and that
a total of 73 vacancies were already been reported
to the PSC entrusting selection. Hence the counsel
for the 4th respondent argued that the petitioner
cannot have any grievance in the matter.
4. In view of the rival submission made by the parties,
in view of Ext.P2 Report and in view of the pendency
of Ext.P3 Representation before the 2 nd respondent,
I deem it fit to direct the 2nd respondent to consider
and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, after hearing
the petitioner as well as the 4 th respondent, within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment. The 4th respondent
shall not make any contractual appointment without
getting prior approval as required under Rule 185A
of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
M.A ABDUL HAKHIM, JUDGE
jma
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7525/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY
THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR, COIR
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE U/S 66 OF THE
KCS ACT, 1969
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED
25.1.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR, COIR DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTORATE
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R4(a) A true copy of the proceedings
No.D.C.D/637/2023-C.S.2 dated
12/03/2024 issued by the 2nd respondent
