IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 RP.No. 418 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WA.1822/2009 Dated 07/03/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT: --------------------------------------------------------- THE MOOSPET SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.682, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------------- 1. GOPIDAS T., S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, THEKKEDATH VEEDU, NELLIKKAD, RAMAVARMAPURAM P.O., THRISSUR-680 631. 2. SREEJA T.C., AGED 34 YEARS, THARAKKAL HOUSE, THALIKULAM, PIN-680 569. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR, TRICHUR-680 001. R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss RP.NO.418/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX.A1: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR DTD. 16/06/2009. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss C.N.Ramachandran Nair & Bhabani Prasad Ray, JJ. ==================================== R.P.No.418 of 2011 in W.A.No.1822 of 2009 ==================================== Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011. ORDER Ramachandran Nair, J. Review petition is filed by the Bank against which the learned single Judge directed to the Joint Registrar to issue appropriate directions to make appointments from the rank list prepared after test and interview, which judgment was confirmed by us in writ appeal. There is an observation in the judgment of the learned single Judge and that of the Division Bench that the Bank had informed the Deputy Registrar that after election to the Parliament, appointment will be made. The Bank has denied this fact by saying that there was no commitment and it was absolutely open to the Bank to consider whether the selection made was correct or not. We do not think there is any significance for this contention because, after calling for and verifying the mark lists and the selection process, we felt that those who secured high ranks are entitled to appointment since interview R.P.No.418 of 2011 -:2:- marks about which manipulations are alleged by the Bank did not have much significance because maximum marks for the interview was only 12 as against 80 provided for written examination. We, therefore, do not find any ground to review the judgment. Review petition is consequently dismissed. C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge. Bhabani Prasad Ray, Judge. sl.