IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 2879 of 2011(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. JOSEPH MATHEW, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH, MANIKOMBIL, KANJIRAPPALLY.P.O., DIST. KOTTAYAM. 2. PRESANAN.N.V., AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, NAIKARI HOUSE, ARPOOKKARA VILLAGE, VILLOONNI.P.O., KOTTAYAM. 3. M.M. SURENDRAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN, MANKKACHIRAYIL, VADAYAR.P.O., VAIKOM, DIST.KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM SRI.R.MAHESH (KOTTAPPURAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER. KOTTAYAM. 2. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOTTAYAM. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KERALA STATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOTTAYAM. WP(C).No. 2879 of 2011(H) 6. BIBIN, LIFT OPERATOR, HEAD OFFICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOTTAYAM. 7. GEETHA, PEON, KURUPPANTHARA BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM. 8. FYSAL, PEON, KANJIRAPPALLI BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM. 9. M.RAJESH,PEON, VAIKOM BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM. 10. THANKAMANI, PEON, THALAYOLAPARAMBU BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM. 11. RAJESH MURALI, TELEPHONE OPERATOR, HEAD OFFICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI FOR R1,2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.2879 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th April, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners are presently working as Peons in the first respondent bank. They filed this writ petition alleging that though respondents 6 to 11 were not qualified for promotion to the category of Clerks/Cashier on the date on which the notification inviting applications was published by the Kerala Public Service Commission, the first respondent bank is taking steps to promote them in preference to the petitioners. It is stated that as on the date of the issuance of the notification respondents 6 to 11 did not have three years qualifying service and therefore they are ineligible to be promoted. 2. As per the feeder category rules a copy of which is on record as Ext.P8, sub staff of the bank who have passed the SSLC examination and the JDC examination as on the date of the notification, are eligible to be promoted to the category of Clerk/Cashier. It is further stipulated that to be eligible for W.P(C) NO.2879/2011 -:2:- promotion they should have completed three years of regular service. The main contention raised by the petitioners is that respondents 6 to 11 did not have the said qualification of three years service in the feeder category and therefore they are not eligible to be promoted to the category of Clerk/Cashier. There is thus a dispute between the petitioners on the one hand and respondents 6 to 11 on the other as regards the entitlement of respondents 6 to 11 to be promoted to the category of Cashier/Clerk. Such a dispute, in my opinion, is a dispute which has to be raised before the Co-operative Arbitration Court in view of the express stipulations in that regard contained in sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. From the decision of the Co-operative Arbitration Court an appeal lies to the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal. Under section 70(2) of the Act, the petitioners can move the Co-operative Arbitration Court for interim reliefs pending disposal of the arbitration case. I am therefore of the considered opinion that the petitioners should invoke the said remedy instead of moving this Court at this stage. W.P(C) NO.2879/2011 -:3:- The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the petitioners' right to move the Co-operative Arbitration Court seeking redressal of their grievances. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.2879 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 5th April, 2011