IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27882 of 2008(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. THE THRISSUR TALUK CO-OPERATIVE COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY LTD.NO.R 728, KALLINGAL LANE, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. P.G.PANKAJAM, PRINCIPAL, CO-OPERATIVE ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE, KALLINGAL LANE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CO-OPERATIVE ARBITRATION COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DHARMATMAJAN K.R., KOTTILINGAL HOUSE, AVANOOR P.O., MUNDOOR VIA, THRISSUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/09/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. ================================== W.P.(C)No.27882 of 2008 ================================== Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008. JUDGMENT Having regard to the nature of the directions being issued hereunder, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with preserving his right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader. The second respondent was temporarily removed from the charge of the Principal and the second petitioner was put in charge. It appears that the second respondent has filed an arbitration case under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The first petitioner employer was entitled to be heard in relation to any interim order that was to be passed, if at all. However, as per Ext.P4 dated 9-9-2008, the Co-operative WPC27882/08 -:2:- Arbitration Court has granted an interim order that the post of Principal be restored to the second respondent herein and restraining the second petitioner herein from acting as the Principal of the College, until further orders. 3. Without expressing anything on merits of the case, the first and foremost point to be noted is that, such an order ought not to have been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing, at least to the first petitioner herein, who is the employer. For this short reason, it is ordered that Ext.P4 will stand suspended and the second petitioner will continue to officiate as Principal. Petitioners, if so advised, will file counter affidavit to the interlocutory application before the Arbitration Court within one week of receipt of the copy of the A.R.C and I.A. from the Arbitration Court and the Arbitration Court will make an endeavour to hear the parties in relation to that WPC27882/08 -:3:- I.A. and dispose of that matter afresh, in accordance with law. It is clarified that this judgment shall not be relied on at the final hearing of the I.A. or for any other purpose and all such proceedings shall be decided, untrammelled by anything stated in this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Communicate copy of this judgment to respondents 1 and 2. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. sl.