IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2009 / 29TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 25655 of 2006(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M. SASIDHARAN NAIR, MADHURIMA, POTHANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 584. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJASEKHARAN NAYAR SRI.JOHN K.JOSEPH(SAJAN) SMT.K.N.RAJANI SMT.MANJUSHA MOHANDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND BOARD, KUNNUMPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. AYIROOPPARA FARMER'S SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.T.2154, POTHENCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 584, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 4. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.T.846, KUTTIKADU JUNCTION, MANACADU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 009. ADV. SRI.G.BIJU FOR R4 SRI.S.JAYAPRAKASH (MADAVOOR) FOR R4 SRI.P.V.MOHANAN,SC,K.ST.CO.OP.EMP.PENSI FOR R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Ext.P1. True copy of the proceedings of the 3rd respondent No.447/2003 dated 1.3.2004. Ext.P2. True copy of the Order No.G.O.(Rt) 440/95 Co-operation dated 2.11.1995 Ext.P3. True copy of the Order No.G.O(Rt).No.184/06/Co-Op dated 18.5.1996. Ext.P4. True copy of the judgment in O.P.NO.29942/99 before the High Court of Kerala dated 12.7.002. EXT.P5. True copy of the Addl. affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent in CCC.NO.1394/02 dated 1.11.2005 before the Hon'ble High Court. Ext.P6. True copy of the letter issued by the District Co-operative Bank to the 3rd respondent dated 8.11.2002. Ext.P7 True copy of the letter issued by the 4th respondent to the Managing Director, Ayirooppara PSCB Ltd., dated 19.8.2006 Ext.P8. True copy of the statement of amounts issued by the Managing Director-in-charge, Ayirooppara PSCB Ltd. to the petitioner dated 10.10.05. Ext.P9. True copy of the order in CCC.No.1394/02 on the file of the High Court of Kerala dated 7.11.2005. Ext.P10. True copy of the petition filed by the petitioner before the Ist respondent dated 10.2.2006. Ext.P11. True copy of the petition filed by the petitioner before the Ist respondent dated 22.7.2006. // true copy // P.A to judge. ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.25655 OF 2006 ------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner entered the service of the 3rd respondent as a Clerk on 22.7.1978. It is stated that his promotion as Branch Manager became due on 1.8.1986. According to the petitioner, to prevent him from earning his due promotion, disciplinary action was initiated and punishment was also imposed. The punishment imposed was set aside by the Industrial Tribunal Kollam in I.D.No.11/90, which was confirmed by this court in the judgment in OP.No.8071/92 filed by the Bank. 2. Meanwhile, petitioner submits that his promotion as Branch Manager became due on 1.7.1990. Subsequently, his promotion as Managing Director became due on 1.7.1996. As according to the petitioner his due promotions were denied, he moved the Joint Registrar and WP(c).No.25655/06 2 also the Government. The Government issued Ext.P2, upholding his claims, but however, that order was not obeyed by the Bank. 3. Again the petitioner moved the Government resulting in Ext.P3 order directing that the monetary benefits and also promotion be given. Even thereafter there was no progress in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner approached this court by filing O.P.No.29942/99 mainly praying for the implementation of Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 referred to above. By Ext.P4 judgment, rendered on 12th July, 2000, this court held that since Exts.P2 and P3 orders were remaining in force those orders are liable to be implemented. On that basis Government was ordered to pass consequential orders in implementation of the earlier orders referred to above. 4. Even thereafter, the benefits were not extended which led the petitioner to file a contempt of court case as C.C. No.1394/02. In that contempt petition, Ext.P5 additional affidavit was filed by the respondent therein, where it was WP(c).No.25655/06 3 stated in paragraph 4 that he had no objection in any authority of the Co-operative Department deciding on the claims of the petitioner. 5. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was appointed as the Managing Director in 2002 and subsequently by Ext.P1 order dated 1.3.2004, petitioner was allowed to retire under a voluntary retirement scheme. Following Ext.P5 affidavit referred to above, he moved the Joint Registrar of Co- operative Societies by filing Exts.P10 and P11 representations for quantifying his dues. The counsel for the petitioner also made available before me a communication dated 27.7.2007 issued by the Joint Registrar expressing his willingness to proceed with the matter. 6. Petitioner submits that he and his wife and mother had availed of loans from the Bank and that he represented to the Bank requesting that the liability be adjusted from out of his terminal benefits. It is his compliant that without allowing the request so made, with a vengeance, the Bank initiated WP(c).No.25655/06 4 coercive action against their sureties and it is at that stage this writ petition was filed. 7. In this writ petition what the petitioner now submits is that, as stated in Ext.P5 additional affidavit filed in the Contempt of Court proceedings he moved the Joint Registrar by filing Exts.P10 and 11 and that the joint Registrar should quantify the amounts which are due to him and that from out of the amount that is found to be due, the liability due from the petitioner, his mother and his wife should be adjusted and the balance should be released to him. 8. I heard the counsel for the parties. Having regard to the averments made by the Bank in Ext.P5 affidavit referred to above I do not find any reason why the Joint Registrar should not be asked to consider the representations made. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. The first respondent shall, consider Exts.P10 and P11 representations filed by the petitioner with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent Bank and determine the WP(c).No.25655/06 5 monetary entitlement of the petitioner on account of Exts.P2, P3 and P4 referred to above. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. It is directed that, if emoluments are revised by the first respondent, necessarily supplementary contribution if any that is due to the 4th respondent shall be met by the 3rd respondent. It is also directed that from out of the amounts that are found to be due to the petitioner, it will be open to the 3rd respondent Bank to adjust the liability of the petitioner, his wife and his mother, after giving credit to the amount realised pursuant to the interim order and the balance amount due to the petitioner shall be released. It is directed that in the meanwhile until orders are passed by the first respondent as above the interim order will remain in force. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.25655/06 6