IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19996 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ E.K.SULAIMAN, S/O. MARAKKARUTTY, PEON, THENNALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VALAKKULAM, MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH SRI.V.R.JAIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MALAPPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), TIRUR. 3. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE UNION, REP. BY ITS SECRETRY, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, CO-OPERATIVE TRAINING COLLEGE, TALI, CALICUT. 5. THE THENNALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VALAKKULAM, MALAPPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRTARY. R1,R2 BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.19996 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The 5th respondent appointed certain persons in its service as peons. They were later promoted. Those promotions were found fault with by the Assistant Registrar. That resulted in the reversion of those persons. In the mean while, the petitioner was selected and appointed by the 5th respondent to one of those posts which fell vacant on account of the promotion of the aforesaid persons. As as result of the reversion of the aforesaid persons, the petitioner had to vacate office. It is stated that this Court came to the rescue of the petitioner as per Ext.P3 judgment and ordered that the petitioner cannot be deprived of his employment without an opportunity of pre-decisional hearing. Resultantly, the first respondent Joint Registrar was directed to hear the petitioner on that issue. Such hearing is yet to happen. This means that the petitioner is, as of now, a regular employee of the 5th respondent. The persons who faced reversion are stated to have moved the arbitration court and WPC.19996/08 Page numbers have obtained certain interlocutory orders, by which, they are also continuing in service. Under such circumstances, any decision of the 5th respondent to send the petitioner for JDC course with the third respondent cannot be faulted, if the mere participation and undergoing the course may not tilt equalities in favour of the petitioner in the matter pending before the Joint Registrar following Ext.P3 judgment. With the aforesaid clarification, this writ petition is ordered directing that the needful shall be done by the second respondent on any recommendation of the 5th respondent to send the petitioner as an in-service candidate for the JDC course of the academic year 2008-09. Let that be done immediately on receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.10/7.