IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2010 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36068 of 2010(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RANJINI.V.P, W/O. BALAN, REVATHI, MILK SOCIETY ROAD,B STREET, MANANTHAVADI.P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT - 670 645. (V.P.RENJINI, MANAGER , MANANTHAVADI, FARMERS SERVICE CO.OP BANK , MANANTHAVADI. BY ADVS. SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. MANANTHAVADI FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO. 4034, P.B, NO.6, MANANTHAWADY, WAYANAD - 670 645. 2. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, MANANTHAVADI FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO. 4034, P.B, NO.6, MANANTHAWADY, WAYANAD - 670 645. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), KALPETTA, WAYANAD. 685 508. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION (C) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001. R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.36068 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner retired from the service of the first respondent -bank on 31.5.2009, on superannuation. Disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner while she was in service. This Writ Petition has been filed mainly with the prayer to call for the records leading to Exts.P6, P7, P8, P10 and P13 and quash the same. Ext.P6 is the intimation given to the petitioner regarding constitution of the disciplinary committee. Ext.P7 is the memo of charges issued to the petitioner. Ext.P8 is the communication dated 15.7.2009 issued by the second respondent to the effect that the superannuation of the petitioner from the service of the bank would not be approved though she had attained the age of superannuation. Ext.P10 is the charge-sheet detailing the charges issued to the petitioner on receipt of Ext.P9 reply from her. Ext.P13 is the order passed by the third respondent dismissing CRP.No.2396/2010 filed by the petitioner. 2. As already noticed, certain serious charges were levelled against the petitioner including the one related to the pledging of spurious gold ornaments. The petitioner has attained the age of superannuation on W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 2 30.5.2009. Earlier, she has approached this Court by filing W.P.(C).NO. 14593/2009. The said Writ Petition was filed mainly with the prayer to revoke her suspension. The said Writ Petition was disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment dated 29.5.2009 directing the first respondent- bank to complete the disciplinary action against the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. It is subsequent to that as per Ext.P6, disciplinary committee was constituted. Later, Exts.P7 memo of charges and P10 charge sheet were issued to the petitioner. After the issuance of Ext.P10 charge sheet, the petitioner has approached the third respondent by filing Ext.P11 petition under Rule 176 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. True that as per Ext.P12, this Court has stayed the continuation of disciplinary proceedings till orders are passed on Ext.P11. Admittedly, subsequent to Ext.P12 judgment, Ext.P13 order was passed by the third respondent. As per the said order, the third respondent rejected the prayer of the petitioner for rescinding resolution dated 18.6.2009 and the first respondent -bank was directed to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a period of two months. In this context, it is to be noted that as per Ext.P5 judgment, this Court had earlier, directed the first respondent-bank to complete the disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner. Obviously, Ext.P13 is W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 3 also on the same lines. Of course, a time limit was also fixed as per Ext.P13 for completion of the disciplinary proceedings. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P13, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P14 appeal before the Government in terms of Section 83(1)(j) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. It is dated 4.9.2010. The prayer in this Writ Petition is essentially for an expeditious consideration of Ext.P14 appeal. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to keep in abeyance the domestic enquiry proceedings initiated against her. 3. A scanning of the contentions raised in this Writ Petition would reveal that the grievance of the petitioner is with respect to the continuation of the disciplinary proceedings on the ground that she had attained the age of superannuation on 31.5.2009. Therefore, according to her, no such disciplinary proceedings could be continued against her. At the same time, it has to be noted that the petitioner approached this Court on the verge of attaining of the age of superannuation. W.P.(C).NO. 14593/2009 was disposed of by this Court on 29.5.2009 ie. just two days before the petitioner attained the age of superannuation. The contention of the petitioner is that she has already attained the age of superannuation on 31.5.2009 and therefore, there is no scope for continuing with the W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 4 disciplinary proceedings initiated against her as per Exts.P7 and P10. The petitioner has raised such contentions in Ext.P14 appeal. She has also submitted that considering the fact that this Court, while disposing W.P. (C).NO.12189/2010 as per Ext.P12, granted stay of the disciplinary proceedings, the same may be directed to be continued till Ext.P14 appeal is disposed of. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is confining her prayers in this Writ Petition to one for a direction to the Government to consider Ext.P14 appeal, expeditiously. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation on 31.5.2009 and that Ext.P14 appeal preferred by the petitioner is still pending consideration before the 4th respondent, I am of the view that such a direction can be issued in this Writ Petition. The contention of the petitioner is that on account of her attainment of the age of superannuation on 31.5.2009, no punishment as such could be imposed on her even if the disciplinary proceedings is continued. As already noticed, at the time of Ext.P5 judgment , the petitioner hardly had a couple of days for retirement. Even then, this Court directed the W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 5 respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings as expeditiously as possible. There is no invariable position that such disciplinary proceedings could not be continued merely because the petitioner has crossed the age of superannuation. Continuation is certainly permissible for certain purposes. At any rate, that is a matter which is to be decided only on the culmination of the proceedings. In the circumstances, the petitioner is justified in limiting the prayers to one for a direction to the 4th respondent to dispose of Ext.P14 appeal expeditiously. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P14 appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. However, considering Ext.P2 judgment in W.P.(C).No.12189/2010, it is directed that the first respondent shall not pass final orders even on completion of disciplinary proceedings till orders are passed on Ext.P14 appeal. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 6 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.36068/2010 7