IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2008 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3672 of 2004(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- V.K.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. KUMARAN, SWEEPER, PANANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, RESIDING AT VELLINA HOUSE, PANANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SRI.K.M.ANTHRU RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, STATE SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVES, ERNAKULAM. 3. PANANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REG.NO.655, PANANGAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. *( 4. SHRI.MATHEW GEORGE, JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ERNAKULAM.) * (THE NAME OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DTD. 29/11/2006 IN I.A.16476/06) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN – R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR,SC.CO.OP.E COMMN. SRI.V.M.KUTTY MOOSA - R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.3672/2004 K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.46/2000 OF 31/10/2000 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVES. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DTD. 11/10/2002 IN OP.NO.29664/02. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.CRP 1/5858/01/K.DIS DTD. 2/12/02 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DTD. 15/2/2003 TO BE SERVED UPON THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN O.P.NO.22465/03. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.CRP 1/5761/03 DTD. 7/1/2004 FROM THE 2ND/4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(1): COPY OF THE DECISION NO.394 TAKEN BY THE DIRECTOR BOARD OF 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(2): COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.3672 of 2004-K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.This writ petition filed in the year 2004 relates to a claim of a part-time sweeper of a co- operative bank. Whatever be the alternate remedies that may be available in the realm of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules, having regard to the issue involved and the time lag, I am not inclined to relegate the petitioner to any other forum. 2.Going by the counter-affidavit, the petitioner is only a sweeper on daily wages, at the rate of Rs.25/-, though he was paid on monthly basis at Rs.750/-, for the sake of convenience. It appears that he was appointed after he lost his mother Madhavi, who was the sweeper in the bank. She WP(C)3672/2004 -: 2 :- died in 2002 and the petitioner was carrying out the duties and responsibilities as a sweeper. He obtained Ext.P2 judgment from this Court directing consideration of his claim by the Co-operative Department, in 2000. This was followed by Ext.P3 order by the Joint Registrar who, without deciding the issue, merely passed on the buck to the bank which, in turn, issued Ext.R3(1) taking the stand that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of Ext.P1. Even that decision was taken only after this Court issued yet another direction in the form of Ext.P5. 3.At this distant point of time, it needs to be noticed that it is not the case of the 3rd respondent bank that it has any other sweeper. Indisputably, the petitioner had been sweeping the premises from 1992. Though in Ext.R3(1) the bank has stated that it was not satisfied the manner in which the petitioner is discharging the duties and responsibilities as a sweeper, it is inappropriate to project such a defence at that point of time. WP(C)3672/2004 -: 3 :- Going by the materials on record, there was no room for any complaint in that regard. While it is exclusively within the realm of the bank to ensure that discipline is maintained and the sweeper does his job, it is also the requirement that such persons working in the lowest strata, that too, in a co-operative sector, need to be appropriately supported and this is the fundamental wisdom behind the decision in the form of Ext.P1 which aims more, at sustenance. 4.The Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and the Rules do not provide a staff pattern which may call for an approved post of a part-time sweeper. I say so because, in the case in hand, while the third respondent bank states that there is no post of a part-time sweeper, it has also no case that there are other sweepers or posts of sweepers in the bank. Nor, that the bank premises needs no sweeping. 5.In the aforesaid circumstances, Ext.P6 issued by WP(C)3672/2004 -: 4 :- the Joint Registrar does not stand to reasons and justice. It is a basic component of human rights and the fundamental right to life, to have appropriate sustenance and in the absence of any prohibiting statutory provision, it is inappropriate to refuse the benefit of Ext.P1 to the petitioner. 6.For the aforesaid reasons, Ext.P6 is quashed and respondents 2 and 3 are directed to ensure that Ext.P1 is given effect to in so far as the petitioner is concerned with such retrospective date as the third respondent may reasonably decide, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case. The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/220508