IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 14TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 7560 of 2006(Y) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- BINU. P.J., S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 28 YEARS, KUTHETHUMELIL HOUSE, KULETTIKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. AMBALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.502, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, O/O. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. INSPECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MULANTHURUTHY UNIT, KANAYANNUR. 4. MANAGING COMMITTEE OF AMBALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 5. A.V.ANIL KUMAR, ACHANKARIYIL HOUSE, KANJIRAMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. SIBY, W/O. MONCY, CHERUTHOTTIL HOUSE, AMBALLOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL. R7 IMPLEADED. 7. ARUN GEORGE D., S/O.DEVASSY, MOYATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, AMBALLOOR P.O., VIA KANJIRAMATTOM. *ADDL. R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.17.8.06 IN IA. 6681/06. ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN FOR R1 & 4 SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS FOR ADDL.R SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR) FOR R5 & R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.7560/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION APPEARED IN THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DT. 17.1.2005. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE CALL LETTER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 9.3.06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7560 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 5th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers :- “(i) Issue a writ declaring that the written test conducted on 7.3.2006 is illegal and is liable to be cancelled because the question paper for the same was leaked out before the date of examination. (ii) a writ of prohibition or such other writ direction or order directing the respondents 1 and 4, not proceed further in the matter of selection of candidates for appointment of Salesman/ Attender since the entire proceedings initiated by the respondents 1 & 4 are vitiated by malafides and serious errors of law.” Apparently the matter, if still live, should be looked into by the second respondent, who is the authority vested with the powers to supervise the functioning of the societies. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of as follows :- In the event of the petitioner approaching the second respondent, the matter will be duly considered by the second respondent with notice to the petitioner, respondent 1 and 5 to 7 and any other affected parties, within another three months. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7560 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 5th September, 2008.