IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 11909 of 2005(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- S.MITHRAN, S/O.DAMODARAN, BHARATHI VILAS, P.O. KANNOOKKARA, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.RATNAKARAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-0PERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CANNORE DISTRICT CO-OP.BANK LTD,. CANNANORE, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN, ADV. SRI.K.M.MOHAMMED KUNHI - R3, ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN,SC,KANNUR DIST.CO.OP.BANK - R3. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.11909/2005-P: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER GO/MS 153/83 DTD. 08/06/83 REVISING THE SALARY OF THE EMPLOYEES OF DT. CO-OPERATIVE BANKS. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R.3. SANCTIONING ADDITIONAL INCREMENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR PASSING PART-I CAIIB DTD. 17/09/88. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R.3. FIXING THE BASIC PAY OF THE PETITIONER TO RS.1200/- ON THE PETITIONER BEING PROMOTED AS ACCOUNTANT DTD. 02/08/89. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. EM (1) 22540/2001 DTD. 02/04/2002 ISSUED BY R.2. DIRECTING THAT C.A.I.I.B INCREMENTS SHOULD BE PAID AS SPECIAL PAY ONLY. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. B/2002-2003 DTD. 09/12/2002 SEND BY THE R.3. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 08/01/2003 SUBMITTED TO THE R.2. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 10/12/2003 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ABOVE LETTER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.11909 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner, an employee of a co-operative bank, completed Part I of C.A.I.I.B. some time in 1988 and thereby become eligible to earn one increment in terms of clause (x) of Ext.P1 Government Order. That Government Order does not say anything specifically regarding the consolidation of such benefit, either as a special pay or any other method of identifying the said increment as an isolated component to be carried as the incumbent goes up the ladder in the establishment. 2. According to the petitioner, those persons who were already in service along with the petitioner and who completed Part I of C.A.I.I.B only at a later point of time get a better benefit in terms of that provision, while the petitioner, who demonstrated better ability by completing that Part earlier gets a lesser benefit. WPC.11909/05 Page numbers 3. In Ext.P6 representation, the petitioner makes specific reference to a clarification letter issued by the Registrar of Co- operative Societies and states that the said clarification does not specify the time scale to which the increment relates and therefore, two anomalies, which he had demonstrated in that representation, would result. 4. However, in considering that detailed representation Ext.P6, Ext.P7, a one line order has been issued, stating that as per the existing rules, the request cannot be considered. 5. Having regard to the issues involved, the Registrar of Co- operative Societies ought to have considered the specific complaint in Ext.P6 vis.a.vis. specific provisions in Ext.P1 G.O., which is an executive order of the Government, and answer the contentions in Ext.P6, if the relief sought for by the petitioner is being refused. This is also necessary, even if there has to be a judicial review of such a decision. This is all the more so because no counter affidavit is also placed on record by the second respondent in support of the impugned Ext.P7. WPC.11909/05 Page numbers 6. For the foregoing reasons, Ext.P7 is quashed and the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kerala is directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the third respondent, to re-consider Ext.P6 and to render a decision thereon afresh, after adverting to and considering all relevant facts and factors. If such decision is adverse to the interest of the petitioner, specific reasons for the rejection of the claim shall also to be stated. Let this be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner and the third respondent are directed to make appropriate appearance before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 4.7.2008, so that the Registrar can fix the date of hearing, appropriately without delay. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.