IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2008 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 11935 of 2004(U) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- A.K.SHANMUGHAN, XX/1476, KALAPPURACKAL, PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN 682 006. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU ABRAHAM PULPARA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, JOINT REGISTRAR OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 2. CORPORATION OF COCHIN EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., NO.331, THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. (CORRECTED) CORRECTED AS SECRETARY AS PER ORDER DT. 31/08/05 IN IA NO. 10226/2004. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION (C) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.M.M.MONAYE FOR R2 SRI.M.S.BREEZ R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 11935/2004 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DT. 22/1/00 BY THE R2. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DT. 6/4/00 BY MR. PAUL VARGHESE M, ADVOCATE. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE ORDER OF COMPULSORY RETIREMENT DT. 14/4/00 BY THE R2. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE APPEAL DT. 19/4/00 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R2. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 1/08/00 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R1 CHALLENGING EXT.P3. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE ORDER OF R1 DT. 21/3/2002 CANCELLING PUNISHMENT ORDER. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 4/12/02 OF R3 DISMISSING ORDER EXT.P6 OF R1. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 24/1/2003 IN EXT.P4 CONFORMING EXT.P3 PUNISHMENT. EXT.P9. COPY OF THE ORDER GO RT NO. 368/2003/CO-OP DT. 10/07/2003 OF R3 REJECTING SUBSISTANCE ALLOWANCE IN AN APPEAL BY R2. EXT.P10. COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 27/1/2004 BY R2 DEMANDING RS. 3,37,154/- EXT.P11. COPY OF THE SUMMONS DTD. 18/4/2005 ALONG WITH THE PLAINT ARC NO. 156/2004. EXT.P12. COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 25/4/2005 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, KOCHI. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2A. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1980-1981. EXT.R2B. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1981-82. EXT.R2C. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1982-83. EXT.R2D. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1983-84. WP(C) NO. 11935/2004 EXT.R2E. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1984-85. EXT.R2F. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1985-86. EXT.R2G. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1986-87. EXT.R2H. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1987-88. EXT.R2(I). COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1988-89. EXT.R2J. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1989-90. EXT.R2K. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1990-91. EXT.R2L. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1991-92. EXT.R2M. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1992-93. EXT.R2N. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1993-94. EXT.R2(O). COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1994-95. EXT.R2P. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 195-96. EXT.R2Q. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1996-97. EXT.R2R. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF AUDIT CERTIFICATE FOR THE YEAR 1997-98. EXT.R2S. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINS SHEET DT. 5/4/00 OF THE DOMESTIC ENQUIRY. EXT.R2T. COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 14/12/99 TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, BY THE PETITIONER IN THE WPC. WP(C) NO. 11935/2004 EXT.R2U. COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 28/1/00, TO THE CHARGE SHEET, BY THE PETITIONER IN THE WPC. EXT.R2V. COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGE SHEET DT. 5/08/95 TO THE PETITIONER IN THE WPC. EXT.R2W. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 15/07/2004 IN WA NO. 1294/2004. True copy Tga THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.11935 OF 2004 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner was the secretary of the second respondent co- operative society. Certain memo of charges was issued to him, that led ultimately to an order of compulsory retirement, which was made effective retrospectively. There were disputes between the parties regarding payment of subsistence allowance. A writ petition was filed before this Court, which ultimately led to the judgment of the Division Bench, Ext.R2(w), in a writ appeal. The rights of parties emerging out of the judgment in that writ petition are essentially preserved by the writ appeal judgment to be worked out later on, depending upon whether the compulsory retirement could be retrospective or not. The question as to whether the memo of charges was issued with appropriate factual and legal foundation and result of the disciplinary proceedings, including the imposition of the punishment are matters which are raised in this writ petition, after those issues fell for consideration of the Joint Registrar and WPC.11935/04 Page numbers the Government. The question whether the petitioner is entitled to subsistence allowance on account of the retrospective compulsory retirement was also decided by the Government against the interest of the petitioner. That is also subject matter of this writ petition. 2. Being a matter which is filed before this Court in 2004, in the normal course, an alternate remedy would not have been thought of to relegate the petitioner to a different forum. But the fact of the matter is that, as of now, Ext.P11 arbitration case No.156/04 is filed by the employer society before the competent arbitrator, invoking provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, raising claims against the petitioner for recovery of amounts. The claims made in that arbitration are, going by the statement of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, essentially those covered by the memo of charges Ext.P1. This means that, on facts, as of now, the dispute inter-se lie in two fora; at the instance of the employer society before the arbitrator and at the instance of the employee, the petitioner, in WPC.11935/04 Page numbers this writ petition. There is a fair chance that ends of justice would not be secured by such proceedings. 3. Within the framework of Section 69 of the KCS Act as amended by Act 1 of 2000, there is a clear exclusion of jurisdiction of the Registrar to interfere with disciplinary proceedings. So much so, the appellate remedy therefrom is also excluded even if it reaches the hands of the Government. Even without dilating much on that aspect, it can be easily noticed that the issues raised by the petitioner in this writ petition are matters that could be reasonably agitated before the arbitrator. However, any decision of the Registrar or the Joint Registrar and the Government which may be against the petitioner in so far as disciplinary proceedings are concerned would stand as bottlenecks in such a procedure being adopted. But that may not be as by now, because the arbitration proceedings initiated by the employer society (Ext.P11) stands stayed by this Court in this writ petition. WPC.11935/04 Page numbers 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, it is necessary that the parties have redressal of their grievances before a single forum and it is, hence, abundantly necessary that the petitioner is relegated by this Court in relation to his disciplinary proceedings as also further claims regarding the subsistence allowance, without, in any manner, interfering with the effect of Ext.R2(w) judgment of the Division Bench and the judgment affirmed thereby. 6. In the result, the decisions of respondents 1 and 3, which are impugned in this writ petition, are vacated and the petitioner is relegated to the competent court viz., the arbitration court. The petitioner may invoke the jurisdiction of the arbitration court by filing an arbitration case within a period of one month from now. If such arbitration case is filed in relation to the disciplinary proceedings, the arbitration court will intimate the authority before whom Ext.P11 is pending regarding the institution of such arbitration case and thereupon Ext.P11 shall also be transmitted to the arbitration court on the strength of this judgment. If the society is desirous of filing any further WPC.11935/04 Page numbers arbitration case, that shall also be done before the arbitration court to be consolidated with the aforesaid proceedings. All the aforesaid proceedings shall be concluded by the arbitration court within an outer limit of six months without fail, having regard to the nature of the claims and the disputes involved. The writ petition ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.3/6.