IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2009 / 15TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 23887 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PARANTHAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.A 202,PARANTHAL P.O.,PANDALAM (VIA), PATHANAMTHITTA,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GOPAKUMAR B., JUNIOR CLERK (UNDER TERMINATION), ARUVIKKARA GANESHAM,MANNAM,PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G),PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.G.D.PANICKER FOR R1 SMT.JEENA JOSEPH FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 23887/2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION DT. 28-4-2007. EXT.P2 RESOLUTION DST. 28-4-1997 EXT.P3 RESOLUTION DT. 20-7-2007. EXT.P4 REPRESENTATION DT. 10-10-2007. EXT.P5 REPRESENTATION DT. 12-3-2008. EXT.P6 JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 34418/2008. EXT.P7 NOTICE DT. 1-7-2009. EXT.P8 ORDER DT. 24-7-2009. EXT.P9 ORDER DT. 14-7-2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------------- EXT.R1(a) SUSPENSION ORDER DT. 7-5-2007. EXT.R1(b) SUSPENSION ORDER DT. 3-5-2007. EXT.R1(c) PETITION DT. 10-4-2007. EXT.R1(d) APPEAL DT. 13-8-2009. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 23887 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 7th October, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Co-operative Society. The Society adopted Ext. P2 resolution to suspend the 1st respondent pending enquiry. On the ground that the order of suspension was issued by an incompetent person, the 1st respondent challenged the order of suspension before the Joint Registrar. He filed a writ petition for a direction to consider the same. While that writ petition was pending, on completion of the disciplinary proceedings against the 1st respondent, he was terminated from service. In view of the imposition of punishment of termination from service, the Joint Registrar rejected the petition against the suspension. However, this Court quashed the punishment on technical grounds and directed the Joint Register to re-consider the petition against suspension. Before the Registrar passed orders pursuant thereto, the disciplinary proceedings again culminated in termination of service of the 1st respondent. However, the Joint Registrar allowed the petition and set aside the suspension by Ext. P9 order directing reinstatement of the 1st respondent. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P9 order. 2. I have heard the parties. 3. I am of opinion that now that the 1st respondent has again been imposed with the punishment of termination from service, no purpose would be served by Ext. P9 order directing reinstatement of the 1st respondent. Accordingly, Ext. P9 is quashed. 4. The 1st respondent submits that against the imposition of punishment, the 1st respondent has filed Ext. R1(d) appeal before the managing committee of the Society. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, counsel for the 1st respondent seeks a direction to the petitioner-Society to consider and pass orders on Ext. R1(d) appeal filed by the 1st respondent. W.P.C. No. 23887/09 -: 2 :- Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner- Society to consider and pass orders on Ext. R1(d) appeal filed by the 1st respondent as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the 1st respondent. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/