IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2011 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 32708 of 2007(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- ----------------------- K.P.NIRMALA DEVI, SR. CLERK, KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.A.707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 582. BY ADV. SRI.V.B.PREMACHANDRAN SRI.P.K.SIVADASAN NAIR SRI.S.MADHAVAN NAIR SRI.GNR.UNNITHAN SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON RESPONDENT(S) :- -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, THE KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.A.707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 582. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), PATHANAMTHITTA,CIVIL STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645. ADDL. 3. M.S.SREEKUMARY, ACCOUNTANT, KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.A 707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. ” 4. K.H.MANIKUMARY, ACCOUNTANT, KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.A 707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. ” 5. K.R.REJIKUMAR, SENIOR CLERK, KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.A 707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. WP(C).No. 32708 of 2007 ADDL. 6. A.C.SALIMOLE, SENIOR CLERK, KAVIYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.A 707, KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R3 TO R6 VIDE ORDER DTD.13.2.2009 IN I.A.No.3927/2008. ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN FOR R1 SMT.RESMI G. NAIR FOR R1 SRI.SHOJAN JACOB FOR R1 SRI.NISHIL.P.S. FOR R1 SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN FOR ADDL.R3TO6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt WP(C).No. 32708 of 2007 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of the decision/order No.2/1995 dated 16-08-1995. Ext.P2 :- Copy of the decision/order No.C.R.P (2) 3230/O.K.Dis dated 21-03-2007. Ext.P3 :- Copy of the judgment in O.P.No.942/2000 of the High Court of Kerala dated 30-03-2006. Respondent's Exhibits :- Ext.R-1(a) :- Copy of the representation dated 18.8.2006 filed by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent Joint Registrar. Ext.R-1(b) :- Copy of the objection dated 28.11.2006 filed by the 1st respondent before the 2nd respondent Joint Registrar. //True Copy// P.A. to Judge P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the Kaviyoor Service Co- operative Bank Ltd No.A 707. She entered service as Junior Clerk in the said bank on 26.06.1987. In due course, she was promoted as Senior Clerk and later as Accountant and still later as Branch Manager to which post the petitioner claims she was regularly promoted with effect from 20.12.1994. 2. While the petitioner was working as Branch Manager she was placed under suspension by order passed on 27.04.1995 for irregularity in maintaining the accounts. A memo of charges was served on her to which, she submitted a reply wherein, after admitting her guilt, she prayed for leniency. An enquiry into the charges was held with notice to the petitioner. After the report of enquiry was received, the managing committee of the bank that met on 12.08.1995 resolved to impose on the petitioner the punishment of reduction to the lower post of Senior Clerk and to re-instate her in service in that category. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and thereafter, the punishment of W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 2 reduction in rank as the junior most Senior Clerk with effect from 27.04.1995, the date on which she was placed under suspension was imposed. 3. The petitioner did not challenge Ext.P1 order in time. More than nine years later, she filed a representation styled as an appeal before the manging committee of the bank. The managing committee that met on 09.09.2005 resolved to reject the same. The said decision was communicated to the petitioner by letter dated 26.9.2009. Nearly one year thereafter, the petitioner filed a representation dated 18.8.2006 before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Pathanamthitta. The Joint Registrar issued notice to the petitioner and the President and Secretary of the bank. They were heard and by Ext.P2 order passed on 21.03.2007, the Joint Registrar rejected that representation mainly on the ground of long and inordinate delay in challenging the order imposing punishment. Hence this writ petition challenging Exts.P1 and P2 and seeking a direction to the respondents to modify the punishment as reduction to the next lower post of Accountant and to grant the petitioner all consequential monetary and service benefits. W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 3 4. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that though the punishment of reduction in rank could have been imposed by the sub committee of the society, in the instant case, the punishment was imposed by the managing committee and thereby the appellate remedy contemplated under rule 198 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules was denied. The next contention raised is that as the reduction contemplated is to a lower rank, it could have been only to the post of Accountant and not to the category of Senior Clerk. Reliance is placed on the unreported decision of a learned single Judge of this Court in O.P.No.942 of 2000 in support of the said contention. 5. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is contended that at the time the petitioner was suspended and disciplinary action was initiated against her, she was only a probationer in the post Branch Manager and therefore, it cannot be contended that she was reverted by two stages. It is also stated that the petitioner had admitted her guilt and it was taking note of the request made by the petitioner for leniency that instead of removing her from service, the punishment of reduction in rank was awarded. The first W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 4 respondent has also stated that the challenge to the order imposing punishment is highly belated. Respondents 4 and 5 who entered service after the petitioner but became her seniors in view of the order imposing punishment have filed a counter affidavit contending inter alia that the challenge to the order imposing punishment is highly belated, that the post, which the petitioner was substantially holding was that of Accountant and therefore, the order imposing the punishment of reduction to the post of Senior Clerk is perfectly in order. 6. I heard Sri.V.B.Premachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for additional respondents 3 to 5. I have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. A reading of Ext.P1 order indicates that though the misconduct alleged, which the petitioner admitted, warranted dismissal from service, taking note of her request, the managing committee resolved to re-instate her in service as the junior most Senior Clerk. It is evident from Ext.P1 that before the said order was passed, a show cause notice was issued and the petitioner was heard on 16.08.1999. The petitioner did not however object to W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 5 the findings in the enquiry report or the proposed punishment. She in fact stated that she has no objection to the proposal to revert her to the category of Senior Clerk. It was in such circumstances that by Ext.P1 order, the punishment of reduction in rank as the junior most Senior Clerk was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner did not challenge Ext.P1 before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies for nearly nine years. As per the provisions contained in section 69 of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, as it stood prior to the amendment introduced by Act 1 of 2000, the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies has jurisdiction and authority to entertain a dispute arising from Ext.P1. In the instant case, the petitioner waited till 18.8.2006 to move the Joint Registrar. The Joint Registrar after hearing both sides came to the conclusion that the challenge to the order imposing punishment is highly belated. In my opinion, on that short ground, this writ petition is also liable to be dismissed. The petitioner has no explanation what so ever for the long delay on her part in challenging Ext.P1 order. That apart, even if such a challenge has been made either before the Joint Registrar or the Co-operative Arbitration Court after W.P.(C)No. 32708 OF 2007 6 section 69 was amended, in view of the recitals in Ext.P1, which disclose that the petitioner had really no objection to the punishment of reduction in rank to the category of Senior Clerk being awarded, the challenge would have been repelled. By virtue of the punishment imposed on the petitioner, respondents 3 to 5 herein who were initially her juniors became her seniors in the category of Senior Clerk. More than ten years had passed thereafter by the time the petitioner moved the Joint Registrar. The petitioner cannot therefore at this distance of time successfully challenge Ext.P1. I accordingly hold that there is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE dmb