IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 27020 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SREEDAS.J,VARADHA BHAVAN,VEECHUCHIRA.PO, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. LIZIAMMA.P.P,PARACKAL HOUSE, ARAYANJILIMON,EDAKADATHI.PO,PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. VENKURINJI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, LTD.NO.3023,REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT,SECRETARY, MUKOOTTUTHARA.PO,PIN:686510,PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(G),PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN FOR R1 SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.S. MOHAMMED HASHIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 27020 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 18th November, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioners aspire for competing for selection to the posts of Attender, Peon and Night watchman. The respondent -bank issued a notification inviting applications, in which an upper age limit was fixed as 35 years with a relaxation of 5 and 3 years for SC/ST, OBC and Ex-servicemen. According to the petitioners, under Rule 183, the maximum age limit prescribed is 37 years with 5 years and 3 years relaxation in the case of SC/ST, OBC and Ex-servicemen. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Call for the records leading to issue Ext. P1 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P6 and P7 application filed by the petitioners in the light of statutory mandate contained in Rule 183 and Ext. P5 circular and in the meanwhile directing the 1st respondent bank not to make any appointment till a final decision is being taken by the Joint Registrar. (iii) declare that appointment to the post of Peon, Attender and Night Watchman cannot be made on the basis of Ext. P1 notification.” 2. At the time of admission, I passed the following order: “The petitioners may also apply pursuant to Ext. P1 notification. Petitioners' applications shall be accepted and processed as if they are valid applications.” 3. Now, a counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent stating that the maximum age limit prescribed in the notification was wrong and therefore that notification was cancelled. It is submitted W.P.C. No. 27020/2009 -: 2 :- that it is proposed to issue a fresh notification correcting the mistakes in the earlier notification. In the above circumstances, recording the counter affidavit, this writ petition is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to file applications pursuant to the fresh notification. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.