IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1642 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19307/2011 Dated 28/09/2011 .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------ ANCHAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.XAVIER THOMAS, KUNDAKASSERY HOUSE, THIRUNELLOOR.P.O,CHERTHALA.(SECRETARY(UNDER ORDER OF DISMISSAL),THANNERMUKKOM WEST COIR VYAVASAYA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.A 833,CHERTHALA) BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,COIR & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF COIR DEVELOPMENT,COIR BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695033. 3. THE PROJECT OFFICER(COIR),CCNB ROAD, COIR CORPORATION BUILDING, ALAPPUZHA-688001. 4. THE COIR INSPECTOR, CIVIL STATION, CHERTHALA-688524. W.A.No.1642/2011 5. THE PRESIDENT,THANNEERMUKKOM WEST COIR VYAVASAYA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.A 833, THANNEERMUKKOM.P.O,CHERTHALA-688527. 6. THANNEERMUKKOM WEST COIR VYAVASAYA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.A 833,THANNERMUKKOM.PO CHERTHALA-688527,REPRESENTED BY ITS HONORARY SECRETARY(WRONGLY SHOWN AS PRESIDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION). GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL ADV.SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI FOR R5 & R6. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.NO.1642/2011 APPENDIX ANNEXURE-1: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SUB COMMITTEE DT.3.10.2011 //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag.C.J. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. -------------------------------- W.A.No.1642 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Ag.C.J. The appellant, a long term Secretary of the 6th respondent Society, is dismissed from service on various charges after enquiry. The appellant's case is that the 5th respondent, the President of the Society, is instrumental for the bogus charges framed against her for the reason that the appellant supported the appointment of Administrator for some time in the society for want of quorum. The appellant has also produced documents to show that the President is facing criminal charges in the FIR filed based on her complaint. Counsel appearing for the 5th and 6th respondents who took notice on admission are also heard by us. 2. After hearing both sides, what we notice is that there is disharmony in the relation of the Secretary and President though both of them are in the very same Society for over 25 W.A.No.1642/2011 2 years. We, therefore, feel that no purpose will be served by the appellant filing appeal against the disciplinary action before the Managing Committee with the same President. Since Section 69 authorises settlement through arbitration of dispute between employees and Society, we feel the appellant can be permitted to waive the right of appeal to the Managing Committee so that the appellant settle her service dispute with the Society in arbitration. 3. The appellant raised a grievance that the enquiry now going on against the 6th respondent is not in the right direction and the President and the Managing Committee are not assisting the enquriy officer with records. We feel, since the appellant was the Secretary of the Society for long and familiar with the operation of the Society the appellant will be in a position to adduce evidence in all matters pertaining to the affairs of the Society. There will be a direction to the enquiry officer to take evidence from appellant also in the enquiry conducted by him against Society. It is for the appellant to produce copy of the judgment and offer her assistance to the enquriy officer with W.A.No.1642/2011 3 regard to the affairs of the Society. The Writ Appeal is disposed of modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge as above. This judgment should not be interpreted as giving any authority to the appellant to independently handle any records of the Society and the judgment should be taken as an enabling authority to enquiry officer to conduct proper enquiry with the assistance of the appellant to understand the nature of transactions revealed from the records and accounts. There will also be a direction to give access to the enquiry officer to give all records of the Society for the purpose of his enquiry. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Acting Chief Justice) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) ps/4/11