IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 20423 of 2006(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KONNATHADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. K. 260, KONNATHADY.P.O, IDUKKI, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT T.G.RAJANKUTTY, THEKKADAYIL HOUSE, KONNATHADY.P.O, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.K.BABU THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, COOPERATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, IDUKKI AT PAINAVU. 4. SRI.JANABAKTHAN N.T., NIRAPPEL HOUSE, KONNATHADY.P.O., IDUKKI. ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF CONFESSION STATEMENT OF R4 DT.14.6.1993. P2: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P. NO.18856/2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DT.7.10.2003. P3: TRUE COPY OF AWARD IN I.D. NO.80/2004 OF LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM DT.27.2.2004. P4: TRUE COPY OF PETITION OF R4 TO R2 DT.23.1.2005. P5: TRUE COPY OF COUNTER STATEMENT TO R3 DT.11.7.2006. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(a): PHOTOCOPY OF AWARD DT.11.2.2003 OF THE LABOUR COURT. R4(b): .DO. DT.27.2.2004 .DO. R4(c): PHOTOCOPY OF DISMISSAL ORDER DT.27.7.1993. R4(d): PHOTOCOPY OF RESOLUTION DT.27.7.1993. R4(e): PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT OF THE I CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ADIMALY DT.20.4.99. R4(f): PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE DT.1.6.2006 OF R3. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.20423 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner-Bank is challenging proceedings initiated by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies pursuant to petition filed by the 4th respondent challenging his dismissal from service of the Bank. This W.P. (C) has to be necessarily allowed because dismissal order was subject matter of adjudication before the Labour Court and even though in the first round the proceedings of the Labour Court ended up in favour of the 4th respondent, on challenge by the Bank, the same was set aside and remanded by the High Court to the Labour Court again for disposal. Once proceedings before the Labour Court was subject to scrutiny by the High Court, the 4th respondent has no authority to question the authority of the Labour Court to decide the matter. In fact after remand, the Labour Court passed orders confirming 4th respondent's dismissal and he has filed W.P. (C) No.21911/2004. In view of the orders passed by the Labour Court that led to the filing of the above W.P.(C) which is still pending before this 2 court, the Joint Registrar has no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter. Accordingly W.P.(C) is allowed quashing the impugned proceedings initiated by him. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms