IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29874 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.RAJAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU, AGED ABOUT 58 YRS NEDUMTHATTATHIL HOUSE, MAYILADATHADAM, AZHEEKODE. PO, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOINT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KANNUR. 2. AZHEEKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, AZHEEKODE.P.O, KANNUR REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).29874 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Having regard to the nature of the direction being issued hereunder, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with, preserving its right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2. The petitioner was denied work as Night Watchman in the establishment of the second respondent. It is stated that even before that, he was working as a Helper for that institution. This Court came to the aid of the petitioner issuing Ext.P2 judgment and the judgment in O.P.16546/96. He is employed as of now with the second respondent. The issue is as to how the period during which he remained unemployed is to be treated. Being employed in the co-operative sector and belonging to a marginalized category, there is no reason why the first respondent could further delay the consideration of the petitioner's representation, Ext.P4. Though this Court has stated WPC.29874/08 Page numbers nothing on merits, it is sure that a final decision has to follow at the earliest. 3. In the context of Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, while it could be pointed out that there is an exclusive jurisdiction conferred on the arbitrator or the arbitration court to the exclusion of proceedings in the nature of Ext.P3, since the issue in hand is regarding the quality and effect of the ultimate relief that has to flow out of the letter and spirit of Ext.P2 judgment and the judgment in O.P.16546/96, it is directed that Ext.P4 shall be considered as if it is a matter in which directions are sought from the competent Registrar in exercise of the relevant statutory power. In the result, without expressing anything on the merits of the claim, this writ petition is ordered directing that Ext.P4 will be taken up and decided upon, after hearing the petitioner and the second respondent. Let this be done within a period of 45 WPC.29874/08 Page numbers days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and a copy of this writ petition. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.