IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 RP.No. 312 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.303/2010 Dated 18/03/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS -------------------------------- 1. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE FACT EMPLOYEES' CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. NO.E.129, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ELOOR, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT K.PRADEEPKUMAR. 2. THE FACT EMPLOYEES' CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. NO.E.129, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ELOOR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, GEETHANJEE PALLIPPADAN. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. JAYASREE T.V., D/O.P.K.UNNIKRISHNAN, CF-32, FACT TOWNSHIP, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES (GENERAL), ERNAKULAM. 3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO CO-OPERATION (C) DEPT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI R2 TO 4 BY GOVT. PLEADER THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- R.P. No. 312 OF 2010 in W. A. No. 303 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of March, 2010 O R D E R Ramachandran Nair, J. Review Petition is filed stating that the finding of the learned single Judge on the review petitioner's contention of res judicata based on Ext.P5 judgment was not considered by Division Bench while disposing of the appeal. We have heard counsel appearing for the review petitioner and have gone through Ext.P5 judgment. Even though this Court did not grant first respondent's prayer for direction to appoint her in the existing vacancy, it is seen from Ext.P5 that this Court allowed the first respondent's prayer for direction to Joint Registrar to consider Ext.P4 representation pertaining to irregularities in the management of the society pointed out by her. Joint Registrar has in fact considered the application and found that during the validity of the select list vacancy was there and first respondent being the third rank holder was entitled to appointment because the second rank holder 2 did not opt for appointment. We feel the learned single Judge has rightly turned down the review petitioner's objection on the ground of res judicata because when this Court issued mandamus to the Joint Registrar to consider irregularities, it was open to the Joint Registrar to consider irregularity in appointment as well. When the Joint Registrar found that a duly selected candidate was not appointed by the society, it was well within his power to direct the society to appoint the first respondent. We do not find any merit in the Review Petition. Consequently Review Petition is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (P.S. GOPINATHAN) Judge. kk