IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 2754 of 2009(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.KARUNAKARAN NADAR, 'SUBHA DEEPTHI', AMMAN NAGAR, KARAKULAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT, ARUVIKKARA FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.603, ARUVIKKARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ARUVIKKARA FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.603, ARUVIKKARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. By GP SRI K C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 2754 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner, while employed as a servant of the third respondent, was dismissed from service following disciplinary proceedings. Against that he filed an appeal to the committee of the society and that appeal was also rejected. He filed an arbitration case. ARC 37 of 2000 was decided on 30.3.2001 holding against the plea of the petitioner. Parallel to the arbitration proceedings, petitioner also filed writ petition before this court. However, that writ petition was disposed of on 17.11.2000, that is, before the arbitration award directing the committee of the society to consider the appeal of the petitioner. That decision in the appeal has also merged in the award of the Arbitrator(Ext.P3). After issuance of Ext.P3 in March 2001, the petitioner got yet another order against him in the form of Ext.P9, whereby the Joint Registrar refused to interfere with the decision of the management. With the passage of time, after 5 to 6 years, all those decisions have become final, the petitioner not having carried the award in a statutory revision or appeal before the Tribunal. Obviously, if at all petitioner would have any WP(C) 2754/2009 2 remedy, it is only to move the Tribunal, if it has power to do so to consider any application to condone the delay. Writ petition is dismissed. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk