IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2011 / 21ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 24271 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.CHANDRAN, S/O.ANANDAN NAMBIAR, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, WAYANAD DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., MUTTIL BRANCH, MUTTIL, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SRI.M.NEERAJ SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, WAYANAD DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., H.O.KALPETTA, NORTH, WAYANAD-673 122. 3. THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION SUB COMMITTEE, WAYANAD DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., KALPETTA, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN-673 122. 4. THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE, WAYANAD DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., KALPETTA NORTH, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, PIN-673 122. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24271 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the Wayanad District Co- operative Bank Ltd. Disciplinary action was initiated against him which culminated in Ext.P10 order dated 12.10.2009 as per which the General Manager of the Bank awarded the punishment of barring of promotion for two years from 18.3.2009, and to treat the period during which the petitioner was under suspension as eligible leave. Aggrieved by Ext.P10, the petitioner has filed an appeal in terms of Regulation 26 of Ext.P11 Regulations and Rule 198(4) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 before the Board of Directors of the Bank. By Ext.P13 letter dated 1.6.2010, the Administrative Committee which is currently discharging the functions of the Managing Committee of the Bank informed the petitioner that the Administrators have decided not to consider his appeal. Ext.P13 is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the fourth respondent to consider the appeal filed by him from Ext.P10 order and pass orders thereon, after affording him an opportunity of being heard. 2. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that the appellate authority, viz., the Board of Directors, which in the W.P.(C) No.24271 of 2010 2 instant case is the Administrative Committee appointed by the Registrar has a statutory duty under the provisions of Rule 198 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules and also under the terms of the service regulations approved by the Registrar to consider the appeal on the merits and pass orders thereon. 3. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Waynad District Co-operative Bank Ltd. seeks time to file a counter affidavit. In my opinion, in the nature of the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner and the direction that I propose to issue, it may not be necessary to go into the merits of the petitioner's contentions regarding the charges levelled against him. Under rule 198(4) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, the petitioner has the right to file an appeal against Ext.P10 order before the Board of Management. The service regulations evidenced by Ext.P11 also provide for the appeal on the merits and take an appropriate decision thereon having regard to the materials on record. Instead, the Administrative Committee of the Bank which met on 9.6.2010 resolved not to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner. In my opinion, the stand taken by the Administrative Committee cannot be sustained. By the impugned decision, the appellate authority W.P.(C) No.24271 of 2010 2 abdicated its duty to hear the petitioner and dispose of the appeal on the merits. Ext.P13 letter is therefore liable to be set aside. I accordingly allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P3 and direct the fourth respondent to take up the appeal filed by the petitioner from Ext.P10 order, consider the same and pass orders thereon, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the second respondent. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.