Madras High Court
C.Thiragarajan vs Krishi Kesavan ...1St on 12 October, 2022
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011
C.Thiragarajan ... Appellant/4th Respondent
Vs.
1.Krishi Kesavan ...1st Respondent/Petitioner
2.The Joint Registrar of
Co-operative Societies,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District. ...2nd Respondent/1st Respondent
3.The Deputy Registrar of
Co-operative Societies, Thuckalay Circle,
Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District. ...3rd Respondent/2nd Respondent
4.Thiruvattar Primary Agricultural Co-operative
Bank Ltd., No.674, but its Special Officer,
Thiruvattar, Kanyakumari District. ...4th Respondent/3rd Respondent
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set
aside the order dated 15.11.2010 made in W.P.No.9794 of 2008 .
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 6
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
For Appellant : Mr.G.Arunachalam
For R-1 : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy
For R-2 & R3 : Mr.D.Sasikumar
Additional Government
Pleader
For R4 : Mr.B.Brijeshkishore
JUDGMENT
************
J. NISHA BANU, J.
AND
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
This writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by
the learned single Judge in W.P(MD)No.9794 of 2008, dated 15.11.2020,
whereby the learned Single Judge quashed the impugned order passed by
the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and the earlier promotion
that was given to the writ petitioner to the post of clerk was affirmed.
2.When the writ petition came up for hearing on 21.09.2022, an
order was passed by this Court allowing the writ appeal and setting aside
the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Subsequently, a mention
was made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first
respondent/writ petitioner stating that there is a subsequent development,
which will have a bearing in this case and the same was not brought to
the notice of this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
3.In view of the above, the matter was posted under the caption
“for clarification” on 26.09.2022 and the following order was passed by
this Court,
“When the Writ Appeal came up for hearing on
21.09.2022 this Court passed an order in the Open
Court allowing the Writ Appeal and setting aside the
order passed by the learned Single Judge. Thereafter, a
mention was made by the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the first respondent stating that there were
certain developments which were not brought to the
notice of this Court and hence, the matter was directed
to be posted under the caption "for clarification", today.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing
today, it was informed that when the Writ Appeal came
up for hearing before the earlier Division Bench, it
was informed that by virtue of the increase in turn over,
there is an increase in the cadre strength to the post of
Clerk. Hence, the Division Bench directed the learned
Additional Government Pleader and also the counsel
representing the Society to ascertain as to whether
both the appellant as well as the first respondent can
be accommodated in the said post, without disturbing
their position. This important factor was not brought
to the notice of this Court and hence, this Court
proceeded to pass orders on merits on 21.09.2022.
3. In view of the above, the order passed on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
21.09.2022 is withdrawn and there shall be a direction
to post this Writ Appeal under the caption "for final
hearing" on 12.10.2022.”
4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth
respondent, on instructions, submitted that as per the amended Bye Laws,
which came into effect from 30.01.2013, the cadre strength insofar as the
post of Clerk is concerned, has been fixed as two(2). The learned counsel
also produced the final audit that was conducted for the period
2020-2021 and we find that as against the name of the appellant, his
designation has been marked as 'Clerk-I' and as against the name of the
writ petitioner/first respondent, it has been noted as Clerk-II. It is,
therefore, clear that both the writ petitioner as well as the appellant have
been accommodated to the post of Clerk.
5.In the considered view of this Court, since the writ petitioner and
the appellant have been accommodated in the sanctioned posts of Clerk,
their position need not be disturbed. Hence, this Court does not want to
go into the merits of the order passed by the learned Single Judge and it
may not warrant any interference. By virtue of the same, since the
appellant is senior to the writ petitioner, the appellant will be entitled to
be promoted to the post of Assistant Secretary and the writ petitioner will
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
be entitled to be promoted to the post of Senior Clerk. If necessary orders
are passed to this effect, there can be no grievance for both the appellant
and the writ petitioner and their seniority status can be maintained as it
is.
6.In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the fourth
respondent/Co-operative Bank to pass a resolution in terms of the above
direction issued by this Court, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order and the same shall be forwarded to the
Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Nagercoil. The Joint Registrar
shall act upon the resolution and pass necessary orders within a period of
six weeks thereafter.
7.This writ appeal is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[J.N.B.,J.] & [N.A.V.,J.]
12.10.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
J.NISHA BANU, J.
AND
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Ns
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A(MD)No.591 of 2011
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011
12.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
