IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 1024 of 2008 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.13528/2008 DATED 25/04/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS IN W.P: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. M.ABDUL JABBAR, MANAGER, KHADI GRAMODYOG BHAVAN, PAYYANNUR KHADI CENTRE, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DIST. 2. SAJI MATHEW C., MANAGER, KHADI GRAMODYOG BHAVAN, KHADI TOWER, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN W.P: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KHADI BHAVAN, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE VICE CHAIRMAN, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.P.HARISH, S.C. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== W.A.No.1024 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 23nd day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT Ravindran,J. The writ petitioners in W.P.(C)No.13528 of 2008 are the appellants. The Writ Petition was filed challenging Ext.P5 circular dated 1.4.2008 issued by the Secretary, Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board to the extent it prescribes five years service in the Board after acquiring the prescribed qualification for promotion to the post of Junior Co-operative Inspector. The petitioners have also prayed for a declaration that they are fully qualified to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Co- operative Inspector. By judgment delivered on 25.4.2008, the Writ Petition was dismissed relying on Exts.P7 and P8 judgments. Hence this Writ Appeal. 2. We heard Sri. Elvin Peter P.J., the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. The learned counsel for the appellants contended relying on Ext.P6 judgment of this Court WA 1024/08 -: 2 :- that there is a conflict of judicial opinion and therefore, the matter requires to be examined by a Full Bench of this Court. 3. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar. In Ext.P6 judgment, interpreting Rule 187 of the Kerala Co- operative Rules, a Division Bench of this Court held that the experience prescribed in the said rule is not experience gained after acquiring the qualification and therefore while inviting applications, the Kerala Public Service Commission was not entitled to prescribe a qualification contrary to the rules. On the other hand, in Ext.P8 judgment, a Division Bench of this Court held interpreting the Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board (Classification and Condition of Recruitment of Staff) Regulations, 2006, hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations" for short, that on the terms of the regulations, the experience prescribed thereunder is one gained after acquiring the prescribed qualification. Ext.P8 judgment was followed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment. In our considered opinion, the appellants are not entitled to rely on Ext.P6 judgment to contend for the position that the principle laid down therein is contrary to the opinion of the Division Bench in Ext.P8 WA 1024/08 -: 3 :- and therefore, the matter requires to be examined by a larger bench. Rule 187 of the Kerala Co-operative Rules interpreted by the Division Bench in Ext.P6 judgment is not similar to Regulation 9 of the Regulations, which arose for interpretation in Ext.P8 judgment. In our opinion, Regulation 9(ab) of the Regulations is not ambiguous. The appellants have also not challenged the validity of Regulation 9(ab) of the Regulations. We therefore concur with the view expressed in Exts.P7 and P8. Further, Ext.P5 circular is in tune with Regulation 9(ab) of the Regulations. The challenge to Ext.P5 is therefore without any merit. The Writ Appeal accordingly fails and it is dismissed inlimine. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 26/5