IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2009 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34633 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SRI.PRAVEEN.M., FISHERMEN COLONY. NO.2, VADDY, KOLLAM-691013. BY ADV. SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES/REGISTRAR OF FISHERIES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASST. REGISTRAR OF FISHERIES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KOLLAM. 4. KAIKULNGARA MALSYA ULPADAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.F (Q) 670 KAIKULANGARA, VADDY KOLLAM-691013. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 34633 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 2nd December, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a junior clerk in the 4th respondent-society. The society is a fisheries society. Formerly, there was no classification as a fisheries society. The Government by G.O(P) No. 124/2006 dated 29-6-2006 brought in a new classification of fisheries society also. Pursuant to the Government Order, the 4th respondent- society was classified as Class V society and staff pattern has also been fixed accordingly. Prior to the classification, there were 4 employees in the society. But, after classification, the sanctioned posts were reduced to 2 as a result of which the petitioner faces retrenchment from service. In fact, by Ext. P5 order, the 2nd respondent has directed the society to retrench the petitioner from service. Pursuant to the same, Ext. P6 notice has been issued to the petitioner to show cause why petitioner's services should not be terminated. The 4th respondent had earlier filed Ext. P4 petition explaining the matter seeking favourable orders. The petitioner submits that it is unjust to terminate the petitioner's service, while Ext. P4 is pending. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am of opinion that the petitioner and the 4th respondent- society should pursue their remedies before the 1st respondent. However, I am of opinion that since Ext. P4 has been filed, the same shall be treated as an appeal filed under Section 83 of the Co- operative Societies Act against Ext. P5 order. There would be a direction to that effect. The 1st respondent shall dispose of Ext. P4 as an appeal under Section 83 as expeditiously as possible. In the W.P.C. No. 34633/2009 -: 2 :- meanwhile, if the petitioner or the 4th respondent approaches the 1st respondent for stay of further proceedings pursuant to Exts. P5 and P6 within two weeks, the 1st respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon. Till then, the petitioner shall not be retrenched from service. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.