IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 16TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27650 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.SIVAKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, SON OF VELAYUDHAN, V.R.NIVAS, MANKALA, KANJIRAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SRI.P.K.NIJOY SMT.K.P.SANTHI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION (C) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -01 3. KANJIRAMKULAM SERVICE CO-OP. BANK, KANJIRAMKULAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 524, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY G.P.SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.27650 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 7th September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a member of Kanjiramkulam Service Co- operative Bank. This writ petition has been filed mainly challenging Exts.P1 and P2 notifications. As per Ext.P1, the third respondent invited applications to fill up two vacancies in the post of Attender and one vacancy in the post of Night Watcher. An advertisement to that effect was made in Deshabhimani daily dated 31.7.2010. Ext.P2 is another notification that came published in Deshabhimani daily dated 2.8.2010 inviting applications for the post of Part-time Sweeper. The only grievance of the petitioner is that the date, time and venue of the written test and the interview are absent in the notifications. Circular No.11/1999 of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue involved in this case. The details which are mandatory in a notification have been specifically given thereunder. A perusal of Exts.P1 and P2 notifications would reveal that the contention of the petitioner cannot be sustained at all. In fact, it would reveal that those notifications have been issued in terms of Circular No.11/1999. The said circular does not contemplate that the aforesaid details have to WP(C).No.27650/2010 2 be specifically mentioned in the notification. In fact, the details which are mandatory in a notification have been given under Exts.P1 and P2. In the said circumstances, I find no merit in the contentions raised by the petitioner and accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS