IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9598 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.S.SELVARAJAN(FORMERLY SECRETARY OF MANKARA SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.,NO.P.363, MANKARA,PALAKKAD DIST.) RESIDING AT THALPOTTA HOUSE, PO KINAVALLOOR, PARLI, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.T.ISSAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL),PALAKKAD. 2. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MANKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.P.363,MANKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 3. THE MANKARA SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD., NO.P.363, PO MANKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY K C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 9598 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF MARCH, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was employed as a Secretary of the third respondent Co-operative Bank. While so, he was dismissed from service on 22.12.2003, pursuant to a resolution of the said committee. The resolution of the sub committee was challenged by the petitioner before the appeal committee of the Board of Directors of the Bank. However, the same was also rejected. The petitioner then approached the first respondent seeking to rescind the resolutions of the sub committee and the appeal committee in exercise of the power under Rule 176 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. The first respondent set aside the resolution. Though the Bank had challenged the same in appeal before the Government, the appeal was also dismissed. A writ petition filed by the respondents 2 and 3 before this court challenging the orders of the first respondent and the Government was allowed. The impugned orders were set aside and the petitioner was directed to move the Arbitration Court under Section 69 of the Co- operative Societies Act. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an Wpc 9598/2010 2 Arbitration Case, which has been allowed ordering reinstatement of the petitioner as the Secretary. He has also been directed to be granted all service benefits consequent to such reinstatement. The present complaint of the petitioner is that the said award has not been implemented by the Bank. The petitioner has also filed Ext.P4 petition before the first respondent seeking enforcement of Ext.P2 award. But, his complaint is that no action has been taken thereon, till date. The learned Government Pleader submits that appropriate action would be initiated on Ext.P4 petition, without further delay. 2. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the petition filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law, and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as respondents 2 and 3. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk