IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35333 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KUTTIPPURATH NARAYANAN NAIR 81 YEARS, S/O.ITHUKUTTI AMMA, KUTTIPPURATH HOUSE, TIRURALI AMSOM DESOM VIA.WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. REGISTRAR OF CO.OP.SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR, CO.OP.SOCIETIES MALAPPURAM. 3. TIRURALI SERVICE CO.OP.BANK, TIRURALI, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CO.OP., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR FOR R1, R2 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 35333 OF 2008 (F) ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 4, notice to third respondent is dispensed with, preserving his right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2. Petitioner says that he is a “Nithyanidhi” Agent for the third respondent bank. He appears to have brought “Nithyanidhi” for the third respondent bank by his contribution of labour. Now aged 81 years, his request is that he should not be denied the benefits of Exhibits P1 and P6 circulars, which relates to regularisation of service. If he gets that benefit with effect from any anterior date, according to him, he could be treated as superannuated at that relevant time, for the benefits in terms of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Employees Self Financing Pension Scheme, 1994. Though W.P.(C) No.35333/2008 - 2 - quite surprising on facts, if the petitioner had been working, there is no reason why the eyes of the employer third respondent bank and the Department should not open and provide some relief to the petitioner, if he is entitled to the benefit of Exhibits P1 and P6 circulars, the benefits of which is not to be refused on the ground that the petitioner has, by this time, reached beyond the age of superannuation. Under such circumstances, this writ petition is ordered directing that second respondent will hear the petitioner and the third respondent and take a reasonable decision in the light of what is stated above. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE skr/2/12 // True copy // P.A. to Judge.