IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD AUGUST 2011 / 1ST BHADRA 1933 WA.No. 128 of 2010 -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.17403/2007 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN W.P.(C) 17403/07: 1. SAM ZACHARIAS.D.THARAYAIL, NOOTHANA VILLA, KODANNUR.P.O, THRISSUR. 2. T.KRISHNAN, VELLAIPALAM SALLA VILLAGE, HOSDRUG TALUK, AJANNUR.P.O, KASARGODE DIST. 3. KUNJU ILLAMPALLY, ILLAMPALLY HOUSE, KILLIROOR NORTH, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C) 17403/07: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY TIS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. T.V.BALAN, PRIYENDU, CHIRAKKAL.P.O, KANNUR. 4. P.X.SUDHAKARAN, PARIYAMTHODIKKALAM, PULIYANAMKUNNU, P.O.CHAVARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. M.K.REMADEVI PARVATHY, VAYALAR.P.O, CHERTHALA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL FOR R1 ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN FOR R2 ADV.SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHAN FOR R3 TO R5 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.Ramachandran Nair & P.S.Gopinathan, JJ. --------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.128 of 2010 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Appellants, who were functioning as the Chairman and members respectively of the Co-operative Service Examination Board, ceased to be qualified to continue in the posts by virtue of an amendment introduced to Rule 182B of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, which is by way of introduction of a proviso to sub-rule(1) thereto. The amendment was after one year and three months of the functioning by the appellants. Consequent upon the amendment, respondents 3 to 5 were appointed to replace the appellants. It is against the amendment and the impugned action, appellants approached the single Judge, who rejected the claim, against which the writ appeal is filed. 2. After going through the grounds raised and after hearing the counsel for the appellants and the respondents, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment because, the issue in principle is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in O.P.No.19272/2002. Further, it has to be noted that the tenure post WA 128/10 2 for which the appellants were appointed do not disqualify them from taking up any employment in Government. So much so, we do not think, appellants have any vested right to continue in the office after the amendment to the Rule by which they cease to be eligible to hold the posts. 3. Even though counsel for the appellants contended that neither the Act nor the Rules confer power on the Government to fix a qualification for the members of the Examination Board, we do not think, the legislation expects people without any qualification to constitute the Examination Board. In any case, since the tenure of the appellants' appointment is over, we do not think, we should go into further details. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed as devoid of any merit. (C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge) (P.S.Gopinathan, Judge) tkv