IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 30500 of 2005(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, SECRETARY, KARUMADI SERVICE CO-OP. BANK, KARUMADI P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KARUMADI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.1141, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GEN), ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) FOR R1 SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER SUPERCEDING THE MANAGING COMMITTEE DTD.2.4.2003. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD.22.6.2004. EXT.P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DTD.22.6.2004. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETR.DTD.2.7.2004. EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.10.7.2004 ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETR.DTD.19.7.2004. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.2.8.2004 OF ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETR. TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.7.8.2004. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.6.8.2005. TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C) NO.30500 OF 2005 ====================================== Dated this the 27th day of June 2008 JUDGMENT I have heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned senior government pleader. 2. The petitioner, the then Secretary of the first respondent, was proceeded against on certain grounds of indiscipline. That ultimately led to Ext.P6, followed by Ext.P8, whereby the petitioner stands reverted to the post of Junior Clerk. That order was issued by an administrative committee. But the intra institutional two tier system of disciplinary proceedings, have, admittedly, not been followed. Even on the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate that the elected committee should reconsider the case of the petitioner and the punishment imposed on him. 3. To have such process, the impugned decisions are set aside, relegating the petitioner to the elected committee, for the consideration of his case regarding penalty. It is also stated that the petitioner is attaining the superannuation age shortly. W.P.(C)30500/2005 2 Therefore, to expedite the proceedings, the petitioner is directed to appear before the first respondent on 7th July 2008. The first respondent shall therefrom conclude the proceedings within an outer limit of one month. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE css/