Kerala High Court
M O Mathew vs Thankamony Peter on 26 September, 2025
1
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 4TH ASWINA, 1947
WA NO. 2718 OF 2015
JUDGMENT DATED 19.11.2015 IN WPC NO.23849 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANT/5TH RESPONDENT:
M O MATHEW
CHIEF ACCOUNTANT, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
BANK LIMITED, SULTHAN BATHERY, NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT
SECRETARY IN CHARGE OF SECRETARY, THE SULTHAN BATHERY
SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, SULTHANBATHERY.
BY SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY
SRI.S.A.ANAND
SHRI.K.A.BALAN
SHRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO
SMT.N.SANTHA
SMT.ANNAPOORNA L
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 & 4:
1 THANKAMONY PETER
D/O.PETER, MANAGER AND SECRETARY IN CHARGE, NOW WORKING AS
MANAGER, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
LIMITED, SULTHANBATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT, 673 592
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695
001.
3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES GENERAL
KALPETTA, WAYANAD 673 121.
2
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
4 THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
SULTHANBATHERY.
WAYANAD DISTRICT, 673 592, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
5 THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,
SULTHANBATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRIT, 673 592.
BY SRI.K.C.ELDHO
SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN - R1
SR.GP, DR.THUSHARA JAMES FOR R2 AND R3
SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR FOR R4
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 9.09.2025, ALONG
WITH WA.2724/2015 AND 2759/2015, THE COURT ON 26.9.2025 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 4TH ASWINA, 1947
WA NO. 2724 OF 2015
JUDGMENT DATED 19.11.2025 IN WPC NO.24063 OF 2005 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT:
M.O.MATHEW, SENIOR CLERK, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-
OPERATIVE, BANK LTD., SULTHAN BATHERY, NOW WORKING AS
ASSISTANT SECRETARY IN CHARGE OF SECRETARY, THE SULTHAN
BATHERY SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD., SULTHAN BATHERY
BY SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY
SHRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO
SMT.N.SANTHA
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 & 5:
1 THANKAMONY PETER, AGED 55 YEARS
D/O. PETER, ACCOUNTANT, THE SULTHAN BATHERY, SERVICE CO-
OPERATIVE BANK LTD., SULTHAN BATHERY AMSOM DESOM, SULTHAN
BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3 JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO OP. SOCIETIES GENERAL
KALPETTA, WAYANAD
4 THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, BY ITS SECRETARY
4
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
5 SOOSI P MATHEW, HEAD CLERK, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO
OPERATIVE BANK LTD., SULTHAN BATHERY (DELETED)
BY SRI.K.C.ELDHO
SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
DR.THUSAHRA JAMES. SR GP
SRI M P ASHOK KUMAR FOR R4
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.09.2025, ALONG
WITH WA.2718/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
5
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 4TH ASWINA, 1947
WA NO. 2759 OF 2015
JUDGMENT DATED 19.11.2015 IN WPC NO.23849 OF 2015 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:
THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OP. BANL
SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592, REPRESENTED
BY ITS PRESIDENT.
BY SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
SMT.BINDU SREEDHAR
SMT.R.S.MANJULA
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1,2,4 & 5:
1 THANKAMANI PETER, D/O.PETER, MANAGER AND SECRETARY IN
CHARGE, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD SULTHAN
BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592.
2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES GENERAL
KALPETTA, WAYANAD 673 121.
4 THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD SULTHAN BATHERY,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592.
6
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
5 M.O MATHEW
CHIEF ACCOUNTANAT, THE SULTHAN BATHERY SERVICE CO-OP. BANK
LTD SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592.
BY SRI.K.C.ELDHO
SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY
SR.GP, DR THUSHARA JAMES
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.09.2025, ALONG
WITH WA.2718/2015 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
7
WA 2724,2718 and 2759/2015
2025:KER:70779
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 26th day of September 2025)
Basant Balaji J.,
W.A.Nos.2724 and 2718 of 2015 are filed by the 4th respondent, and
W.A.No.2759 of 2015 is filed by the 3rd respondent Bank in W.P.(C)
No.24063 of 2005. The 1st respondent herein filed the Writ Petition to
call for the records leading to Ext.P14 and to quash the same. A
declaration was also sought that the 4th respondent is not entitled to get
the leave without allowance converted as deputation to the detriment of
the petitioner therein. The question that came up for consideration in the
Writ Petition is regarding the seniority of the writ petitioner and the 3rd
respondent. The parties are referred to in the judgment as they appeared
in the Writ Petition.
2. The facts of the case are as follows:- The Petitioner, along with
Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, began their service as junior clerks at the bank
on 21 April 1983. They held the 3rd, 2nd and 4th ranks, respectively, in the
list of junior clerks. Subsequently, the 4th Respondent was granted a five-
year leave without pay and allowance to work as a Development Officer
on the I.C.D.P. project. The 4th respondent approached the Bank to get
his period of leave treated as deputation, but by Ext.P3 resolution dated
2 June 1999, the request was rejected. Thereafter, when he applied to
the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, the Registrar instructed the
bank to consider this period as a deputation. However, the bank's Board
2025:KER:70779
of Directors rejected this request, and the Registrar of Co-operative
Societies approved their resolution on 13 February 1991. While the 4th
Respondent was away, junior clerks, including the Petitioner and the 5th
Respondent were granted grade promotions and were promoted to senior
clerks as vacancies became available. The 4th Respondent rejoined the
bank on 4 December 1993, and was later promoted to senior clerk on 1
October 1995. On 30 June 2001, the 4th Respondent requested the bank
to reconsider its previous resolution, convert the leave period from 6
December 1988 to 4 December 1993, into a deputation, and grant him
the promotion and associated benefits he had missed. This request was
denied by a resolution dated 9 July 2001, as the Administrative
Committee had already considered the matter. Following this, the 4th
Respondent submitted a representation to the 2nd Respondent, requesting
that the Administrative Committee's resolution be rescinded.
3. By order Ext.P11 dated 13 October 2004, the 2 nd Respondent
rescinded the Administrative Committee's resolution of 9 July 2001. The
bank was directed to create a new seniority list, treating the 4th
Respondent's period of leave without pay as a deputation, and to grant
promotions based on this revised list. The Petitioner and the bank, feeling
aggrieved by this decision, filed separate appeals to the government. On
16 July 2005, the government issued order Ext.P14, dismissing both
appeals and upholding the 2nd Respondent's decision. This led to the
filing of W.P.(C) No. 24063 of 2005 challenging the government's order.
2025:KER:70779
On 19 November 2015, the learned Single Judge ruled in favour of the
Petitioner, declaring that the 4th Respondent was not entitled to have his
leave without allowance converted to a deputation. W.P.(C) No. 23849 of
2015 was also disposed of allowing the Petitioner to submit a new
representation to the bank in light of the quashing of Ext.P14.
4. Heard the counsel Mr.Peter Jose Christo for the Appellant,
Sri.P.C.Sasidharan for the 1st respondent Bank, the senior Government
Pleader, Dr.Thushara James and Sri.M.P.Ashok Kumar for the 4th
respondent Bank in W.A.Nos.2718 and 2724 of 2015.
5. The Appellant's counsel's main argument is that Ext.P2, a letter from
the Government to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, clarifies that
both government and non-government employees working on the
Integrated Co-operative Development Project can be considered on
deputation from their parent organizations. The Appellant was granted a
five-year leave without pay and allowance for the I.C.D. Project through
proceeding Ext.P1 dated 5 December 1988, just two days before the
issuance of Ext.P2 on 7 December 1988. The counsel asserts that since
Ext.P2 was never challenged in the Writ Petition, the Joint Registrar's
order--which rescinded the resolution denying the Appellant's
employment to be treated as a deputation--is legally sound. Therefore,
the counsel argues, the Single Judge made an error by quashing Ext.P14
declaring that the Appellant was not entitled to have his leave without
allowance converted to a deputation.
2025:KER:70779
6. The counsel for the Appellant argued that the application to rescind
the resolution was filed before the amendment to section 70B of the
Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The counsel for both
Respondent Nos.1 and 4 argued that according to Section 70A of the Act,
Co-operative Arbitration Courts were established to handle specific
powers and functions. Furthermore, Section 70B, post-amendment,
mandates that on constitution of a Co-operative Arbitration Court, every
dispute pending before the Registrar or any person invested with the
power to dispose of the dispute by the Government or the Arbitrator
appointed by the Registrar, in respect of non-monetary disputes, relating
to the local area of jurisdiction of the Arbitration court, shall be transferred
to such Arbitration court and the court shall dispose of the same as if it
were a dispute referred to it under section 69. This provision took effect
on 2 January 2003. Given that the Joint Registrar's proceeding, Ext.P11
dated 13 October 2004, the counsel contended that it was issued without
proper jurisdiction and is therefore legally null and void. For this reason,
the Writ Petition was allowed, and they argued that the appeals should be
dismissed without any further intervention.
7. The Appellant's request to have the period from 6 December 1988 to
4 December 1993, treated as a deputation, and to be granted promotion
with consequential benefits, was denied by the bank's Administrative
Committee. The 2nd Respondent, despite the fact that Act 1 of 2000--
2025:KER:70779
which took effect on 2 January 2003--removed the Registrar's
jurisdiction over such disputes and mandated their transfer to the
Arbitration Court, interfered with the Administrative Committee's
resolution dated 9 July 2001. By invoking Rule 176 of the Kerala Co-
operative Societies Rules, the 2nd Respondent acted without jurisdiction,
rendering their order (Ext.P11) legally invalid. While the learned Single
Judge allowed the Writ Petition and interfered with Ext.P14, the decision
was based on the merits of the case. The judgment, however, should have
focused on the jurisdictional incompetence of the 2nd Respondent in
issuing Ext.P11 and the government's subsequent dismissal of the appeal
(Ext.P14).
8. It has come to our attention that the Appellant was also promoted to
the position of Bank Secretary after the writ petitioner, and both have
retired. The only remaining issue is the seniority dispute between the
Appellant and the 1st Respondent for the Secretary position. To resolve
this, we direct the 4th Respondent to review the issue of seniority and
pass a well-reasoned order. If requested, the parties shall be granted a
hearing. Since the Single Judge's findings were based on the merits, and
the matter is now being sent back to the bank, it has to reconsider the issue
as directed. Therefore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge is set
aside. The 4th respondent shall complete the process within two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Any party who is
aggrieved by the bank's order shall challenge it before the Co-operative
2025:KER:70779
Arbitration Court, as per law.
With these observations, the Writ Appeals stand disposed of.
SD/-
NITIN JAMDAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
SD/-
BASANT BALAJI
JUDGE
dl/
