IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1931 WA.No. 2521 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.24475/2009 Dated 02/11/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ T.S.JOSHI,S/O. SEBASTIAN, GAHAN MESSENGER, THE TAIIPARAMBA PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.M.A.FIROZ SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KANNUR. 4. THE TALIPARAMBA PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS-R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/11/2009 ALONG WITH W.A. NOS.2522/2009 AND 2532/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NOS. 2521, 2522 & 2532 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. These appeals are filed against the interim order dated 2.11.2009 in the Writ Petitions. In order to appreciate the question involved in these cases, it is necessary to briefly refer to the background of the issue. 2. The writ petitioners are employees of the 4th respondent-Co- operative Bank. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioners by the bank. Those disciplinary proceedings culminated in the cancellation of suspension and reinstatement of the petitioners. After such reinstatement, it is seen that, as per the resolution dated 11.2.2003 of the Part Time Administrator of the Society, a decision was taken to grant backwages to the writ petitioners for the period they were kept out of service. That was the subject matter of appeal before the Joint Registrar. Again the matter was pursued unsuccessfully by the writ petitioners before the Government. Those orders were challenged by the writ W.A.NOS.2521,2522 & 2532/2009 2 petitioners before this Court. The learned Single Judge, out of righteous indignation, having seen the plight of various Co-operative Societies languishing for funds for return of the Fixed Deposits, apparently travelled beyond the scope of the Writ Petitions and in the process it was observed that the very reinstatement itself is irregular and illegal. In that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge has called for the records also. 3. It is to be seen that the writ petitioners approached this Court aggrieved only by the recovery of backwages which were originally granted by the Part Time Administrator and which was objected to by the Registrar and the Government. We are afraid, the learned Single Judge is not justified in expanding the scope of the Writ Petition and that too against the writ petitioners so as to reopen the very finding regarding reinstatement in a service matter. The situation would have been different had there been a Writ Petition at the instance of the Bank or somebody in public interest. That is not there. The reinstatement took place seven years back. Nobody had any demur on that so far. The dispute is only with regards to the entitlement for backwages. In the above circumstances, we set aside the interim order under appeal. However, it is made clear that in case the employees are to be paid their retirement benefits, sufficient W.A.NOS.2521,2522 & 2532/2009 3 security with regard to the amount recoverable shall be secured by the Society. In the case of any employees whose retirement benefits have already been disbursed and recovery has to be deferred, the Society shall secure sufficient security from such employees. In that view of the matter and in the manner indicated above, there shall be a stay of recovery till the disposal of the Writ Petitions. Needless to say, unless the writ petitioners furnish sufficient security, it will be open to the 4th respondent-Bank to continue recovery. The Writ Appeals are disposed of as above. (KURIAN JOSEPH) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A.NOS.2521,2522 & 2532/2009 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A.NOS.2521,2522 & 2532 OF 2009 JUDGMENT 13th November, 2009 W.A.NOS.2521,2522 & 2532/2009 5