IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 1ST AUGUST 2011 / 10TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 27951 of 2010(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER : -------------------- U.V.ANILKUMAR, MILK PROCUREMENT ASSISTANT, MARAVANTHURUTHU SKEEROLPADAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.K.43(D) APCOS, MARAVANTHURUTHU P.O., VAIKKOM, PIN-686 608. BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SMT.I.VINAYAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE MARAVANTHURUTHU SKEEROLPADAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.K.43(D)APCOS, REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT, MARAVANTHRUTHU P.O., VAIKKOM, PIN-686 608. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIARY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 001. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.NATESAN R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. S. ABDUL SALAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 27951 of 2010(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.3.2010 OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE SANCTIONING LEAVE TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.6.2010. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 1/94 DATED 11-3-94. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER UNDER RULE 176 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE CIRCULAR 3/95 DATED 17.2.95. EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE G.O. NO. 210/2008 DATED 15.12.2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a) : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.03.2010. EXT.R2(b) : COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 25.03.2010. EXT.R1(a) AUDIT CERTIFICATE & AUDIT MEMORANDUM OF THE R1 SOCIETY FOR THE PERIOD 2005-2006 DATED 24-01-2009. EXT.R1(b) AUDIT CERTIFICATE & AUDIT MEMORANDUM OF THE R1 SOCIETY FOR THE PERIOD 2006-2007 DATED 26-08-2009. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.27951 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st August, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner entered service as a Milk Procurement Assistant in the first respondent society on 21.8.1986. He applied for permission to undergo the Junior Diploma Course by submitting Ext.R2(a) application dated 24.3.2010 to the Managing Committee of the first respondent society. The Managing Committee that met on 25.3.2010 resolved to grant the permission sought by the petitioner and also to grant him leave without allowances. The said decision was communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P1 letter dated 26.5.2010. The petitioner was thereafter granted leave for the period from 7.6.2010 to 30.6.2011. While matters stood thus, the Secretary of the first respondent society resigned from service on 1.5.2010. The first respondent society thereupon took steps to fill up that vacancy and issued Ext.P3 notification inviting applications from eligible persons for appointment as Secretary of the first respondent society. The instant writ petition was thereupon filed on 8.9.2010 W.P(C).No.27951 of 2010 -:2:- challenging Ext.P3 and seeking a declaration that the Managing Committee cannot fill up the post of Secretary. It is contended that as an employee who has been deputed to undergo the Junior Diploma Course the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Secretary consequent on the resignation of the incumbent. 2. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 2.9.2010 wherein it is stated that if at all the society were to depute someone to undergo the Junior Diploma Course, the first option should have been given to the Milk Testor/Lab Assistant, who is senior to the petitioner and that having not been done, the petitioner cannot claim any superior right. It is also contended that the decision taken by the Managing Committee of the first respondent society was not to depute the petitioner to undergo the training, but having regard to his request in Ext.R2(a) application, to grant him leave without allowances to undergo the course. The first respondent society has filed a counter affidavit dated 24.9.2010 wherein it is contended that the society had not deputed the petitioner to undergo the Junior Diploma Course, that when the vacancy arose the petitioner was not qualified and therefore, he has no right to claim appointment to the category of Secretary. It is also contended that Sri.K.C.Chithran, who is W.P(C).No.27951 of 2010 -:3:- working as Lab Assistant, is senior to the petitioner and therefore, for that reason also the petitioner cannot seek appointment. 3. It is evident from a reading of the instant writ petition and the submissions made at the Bar that the dispute raised by the petitioner relates to promotion to the post of Secretary of the first respondent society, which fell vacant on 1.5.2010 on the resignation of the incumbent. Such a dispute, according to me, has to be resolved initially by the Co-operative Arbitration Court, which is empowered under sub-section (2) of section 70 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act to pass interim orders pending disposal of the main dispute. From the decision of the Co- operative Arbitration Court, the aggrieved party can file an appeal before the Kerala Co-operative Tribunal. Therefore, the petitioner has got an effective and meaningful alternative remedy wherein he can seek redressal of his grievances. That apart, it is not in dispute that the society is presently being administered by an Administrator appointed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. A learned single Judge of this Court has in Raghavan Nair v. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, 1998 (2) KLT 1068 held that an Administrator appointed under the Act has no power to effect regular appointments in a co-operative society. W.P(C).No.27951 of 2010 -:4:- Sri.K.C.Chithran, who is working as Lab Assistant in the society, the only other employee, is also not on the array of party. The question whether he is qualified to be promoted in preference to the petitioner can be decided only with notice to him. The petitioner however, has not chosen to implead him as a party to this writ petition. Having regard to the facts stated above, I am of the opinion that the proper remedy open to the petitioner is to move the Co-operative Arbitration Court seeking redressal of his grievances and not to straight away invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a notification issued by a co-operative society inviting applications for appointment to the post of Secretary. I am therefore, of the opinion that no relief can be granted in the instant writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to institute other appropriate proceedings in the Co-operative Arbitration Court. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.27951 of 2010 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 1st August, 2011