IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 29971 of 2004(R) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.S.SALIN KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT, THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.K. 326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. 2. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, SENIOR CLERK, THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. 3. USHA.V.K., JUNIOR CLERK, THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. 4. GEETHAMMA, JUNIOR CLERK, THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. 5. K.B.SHAJI, JUNIOR CLERK, THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, IDUKKI. W.P.(C). NO.29971/2004-R: 3. THE NEDUMKANDAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K. 326, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. *ADDL.R4. K. JAYACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O. KARUNAKARAN NAIR, AGED 41, BLOCK NO. 390, PATTOM COLONY, THOOKKUPALAM, KALLAR.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. *ADDL.R4. IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 05/06/2008 IN I.A. NO. 14977/2004. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN - R1 & R2, ADV. SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH, ADV. SRI.SHANTI PAUL, ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.29971/2004-R: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DTD. 17/11/1998. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED TO THE P.1. DTD. 05/02/1999. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DTD. 01/03/2000. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY DTD. 09/03/2001. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE R.1. DTD. 16/07/2004. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR DTD. 30/09/2004. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.29971 of 2004-R = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.The third respondent, a co-operative bank issued a notification for direct recruitment of Junior Clerks from among those possessing qualification of Graduation and JDC and also knowledge in working of computers. Selection procedure was held and the petitioners were appointed in 1999. Thereafter, the additional fourth respondent filed a complaint that the prescription of qualification for selection was much above the statutory mandate of SSLC and JDC and therefore, many persons have been kept out of the field of choice. Ext.P3 would show that the said additional fourth respondent did not even possess all the statutory qualifications as prescribed by the Act and Rules in as much as he did not possess JDC. This finding in Ext.P2 is not WP(C)29971/2004 -: 2 :- contradicted by the additional fourth respondent. Matters were left there. Later on, on a further complaint by the additional fourth respondent before the Government, Exts.P5 and P6 are shown to have been issued by the second respondent resulting in the termination of the petitioners from service. 2.From what is stated above, it can be seen that the finding, if at all against the petitioners, is only to the effect that the qualification prescribed by the third respondent society for recruiting Junior Clerks in its service was much above the statutory bench mark. There was no dilution in the statutory prescriptions. The Act and Rules require a minimum qualification of SSLC and JDC to be insisted upon for recruiting Junior Clerks. The third respondent, in its managerial wisdom, fixed a higher qualification of graduation and JDC with knowledge in computers. In the fast going economic scenario, where a co-operative bank thought it fit to recruit more qualified and competent hands, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and the Government have WP(C)29971/2004 -: 3 :- acted totally against the fundamental requirements of a co-operative society in passing the impugned orders. The impugned Ext.P6 is clearly in excess of jurisdiction and is illegal and arbitrary. The same is perverse and unreasonable. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed quashing Ext.P6. No costs. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0906