IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 31408 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. K.J.POULOSE, SERCRETARY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 2. OMANA V.V, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 3. REJANY VARGHESE BRANCH MANAGER IN CHARGE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 4. RAJASREE V JUNIOR CLERK, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 5. SREELATHA .S,, JUNIOR CLERK SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 6. JANCY FRANCIS, SENIOR CLERK SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 7. CHITHRA T, JUNIOR CLERK SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 8. MOHANAN T.N, ATTENDER SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. 9. ANOOP P EALIAS, PEON SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST, KERALA. BY ADVS. SRI.SAJU JOHN SRI.JELSON J.EDAMPADAM WP(C) NO. 31408/2010-A RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL) OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ERNAKULAM KOCHI -16. 3. SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE PRESIDENT, SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.23 MULANTHURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DIST R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.31408 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 25th November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners are the employees of the third respondent bank which is a primary credit society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. With effect from 1.11.2003 the third respondent bank was classified as a Class I Primary Credit Society/Bank. The contention of the petitioners is that with effect from March, 2006 the bank is entitled to be classified as Class I (Special Grade). For the said purpose the bank has passed Ext.P1 resolution. Based on Ext.P1 resolution Ext.P2 application has been submitted along with Ext.P1 resolution for approval by the first respondent to classify the society as Class I (Special Grade) Society/Bank. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite Exts.P1 and P2 applications by the Bank, the respondents are not taking appropriate action to classify the society as Class I (Special Grade) and on account of the inaction on the part of the respondents the petitioners who are employees of the third respondent Bank are not getting their due benefits to which they are otherwise entitled. It is a fact that the society has passed Ext.P1 resolution for the purpose of getting the society/bank classified as Class I (Special Grade). WP(C).No.31408/2010 2 The said resolution was forwarded along with Ext.P2 application to the second respondent. According to the petitioners, the second respondent is the competent authority to consider the entitlement of the society for a reclassification in terms of Ext.P1 resolution. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that as per Rule 182 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules (for short `the Rules') classification shall be revised in every three years and as per Ext.P3 Government order the Government have amended the norms prescribed in Appendix III to the Rules. Ext.P1 resolution was passed and Ext.P2 application was submitted prior to Ext.P3. Therefore, according to the learned Government Pleader the third respondent Bank if seeks for a reclassification based on Ext.P3 has to pass a fresh resolution and apply thereafter. In short, since Ext.P1 resolution and Ext.P2 application have been made prior to Government order dated 4.1.2010 and since Appendix III to the Rules was subsequently amended as per Ext.P3 the question of reclassification can be considered only in the light of the amended provisions. In view of the facts obtained in this case, this writ petition is WP(C).No.31408/2010 3 disposed of as hereunder:- It is an admitted fact that Ext.P1 resolution has been passed by the Bank for the purpose of getting the Society/Bank reclassified as Class I (Special Grade). Ext.P2 application was submitted along with Ext.P1 resolution. True that subsequent to the same as per Ext.P3 Government order dated 4.1.2010, the norms in Appendix III to the Rules were amended. Since the resolution and the request have already been placed before the second respondent, I do not think it necessary to compel the third respondent Bank to pass a fresh resolution and then to make an application. It will only be a technical objection raised on behalf of the respondents. What is to be looked into is whether in terms of Ext.P3 the request made by the third respondent Bank could be considered or not. In other words, the entitlement of the Bank to get it reclassified as Class I (Special Grade) in terms of Ext.P3 is to be looked into. Since the second respondent is the competent authority to consider the said aspect and Ext.P2 application along with Ext.P1 resolution have already been submitted before the second respondent, the second respondent shall consider the said question based on Ext.P1 resolution. It is made clear that it will be open to the third respondent Bank to furnish WP(C).No.31408/2010 4 all other relevant materials before the second respondent for the purpose of enabling the second respondent to consider the entitlement of the third respondent Bank to get reclassified as Class I (Special Grade). C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS