IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35324 of 2005(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- 1. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BINANI ZINC EMPLOYEES' MULTI-PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.E.343, BINANIPURAM, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. BINANI ZINC EMPLOYEES' MULTI-PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.E.343, BINANIPURAM, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ERNAKULAM. 3. LIZY RAJAN, W/O. V.T. RAJAN, VELLOOR HOUSE, MUPPATHADAM P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.S.AJAYAGHOSH FOR R3 R1 ABD R2 BY G.P. SRI MATHEW VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.9557/2006 IN WPC NO.35324 OF 2005 DISMISSED. 19.8.2009. SD/- C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.CRB/7477/99/K DIS DT.7.2.00 EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.CRB/2966/00/K DIS DT.27.6..00 EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION DATED 26.9.00 OF IST PETITIONER. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF REQUEST DATED 26.9.00 SENT TO R2. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.CRB/6303/2000 DT. 7.11.2000 OF R2. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DT. 4.12.00 FILED BY PETITIONERS. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DT. 4.7.05 IN WA NO.822/04. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT.) NO.647/2005/C0.OP DT. 15.11.05. RESPONDENT'S EXTS: EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.2.2004 IN OP NO.32728 OF 2000(U) OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. //true copy// C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J ---------------------------------------- WPC. No.35324 OF 2005 ---------------------------------------- Dated, the 19th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed by the Co-operative Society challenging Ext.P8 order issued by the Government confirming the order of the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies who held that the continued suspension of 3rd respondent with out prior approval of the Joint Registrar is illegal. 2. I have heard the counsel appearing for the petitioners and the counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent. 3. Third respondent was suspended from service from the Co.operative society on 7.10.98 and on account of the time taken for completion of enquiry, the initial suspension for six months was periodically extended on three occasions at six months each. Even though the extension of suspension on various occasions were approved by the Joint Registrar, the last period of WPC 35324/05 -:2:- suspension from 7.10.2000 to 6.1.2001 was not approved by the Joint Registrar and he declined the same as illegal. The 3rd respondent's contention is that the during period of suspension which was not approved by the Joint Registrar, the 3rd respondent should be treated as in service and she should be given service benefits including salary. However, the subsequent development is that after enquiry and finding guilty, the 3rd respondent was dismissed from service. Even though the appellate authority allowed the appeal, the society challenged the order in the writ petition before this Court and the implementation of the appellate authority's order was stayed by this Court. Consequently, 3rd respondent is still out of service. I do not think there is any need to set aside the order in this case because of the subsequent development which led to dismissal of 3rd respondent from service is the subject matter in the writ petition pending in this Court. If this court interferes with the order of dismissal, this Court will certainly consider the 3rd respondent's eligibility for back WPC 35324/05 -:3:- wages for the period of suspension. In my view, there is no need to consider the legality or otherwise of the extension of suspension of the 3rd respondent with out prior approval of the Joint Registrar. However, I make it clear that if the 3rd respondent's dismissal is confirmed by this Court, she is not entitled to any benefit for the period of suspension of service. WPC is closed leaving open the 3rd respondent to claim benefit for the period of suspension in the Writ Petition pending in this Court pertaining to her dismissal. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE kvm/- WPC 35324/05 -:4:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Dated:..