Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 17TH POUSHA 193 WA.No. 534 of 2010 ( ) IN WP(C).16422/2009 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.16422/2009 DATED 27 07-2009 ===================== APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WPC: ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES (GENERAL),MALAPPURAM. BY Sr. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.E.M.ABDUL KHADER RESPONDENTS/PETITITIONER & 4TH RESPONDENT IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------- 1. P.KUNHAHAMED, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, PERUMANNA-KLARI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK KUTTIPALA.P.O.,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2. THE PERUMANNA KLARI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KUTTIPALA.P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.B.PRAJITH BY SRI.M.SASINDRAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: W.A. NO.534/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS ANNEXURE A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)18/88/CO-OP.DATED 17 06.1988 ANNEXURE A2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.10295/B1/90-CO-OP DATED 06 11.1990 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE S.SIRI JAGAN & K.HARILAL, JJ --------------------------------------- W.A. No. 534 OF 201.--------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2013. JUDGMENT
S.Siri Jagan, J.
The State and its officers of the Co-Operative Department, has filed this appeal challenging the Judgment of a learned Single Judge in WP(C)No.16422/2009. The facts necessary for disposal of the Writ Appeal is contained the Judgment of the learned Single Judge itself, which reads as follows: "On 01.03.1979, the 4th respondent appointed the petitioner as an Appraiser cum Cashier. Subsequently, he was promoted as a Junior Clerk on 01.07.1979, Senior Clerk on 01.01.1982, and as Chief Accountant on 01.01.1985. It is stated that he got a category change as Assistant Secretary, and is continuing in that post. Subsequently, there arose a vacancy in the post of Secretary with effect from 01.01.2008, and the petitioner says that he is holding charge of the said post.
2. In order to promote the petitioner to the vacancy of Secretary, by Ext.P1, the Bank applied for the approval of the 2nd respondent to exempt the petitioner from educational qualification of degree. On receipt of the application, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P2, seeking certain clarifications from the Bank, W.A. No. 534/2010 2 which were given by Ext.P3. However, by Ext.P4, the request for exemption was declined by the 3rd respondent stating that the benefit of Rule 201 is available only to employees who have entered service prior to 01.01.1974. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed, challenging Ext.P4, and for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P1 request for exemption and grant the same.
3. A reading of Ext.P4 shows that the only reason stated for declining the request in Ext.P1`was that the petitioner entered service of the Bank only on 01.03.1979, and that the benefit of Rule 201 is available only to those who have entered service prior to 01.01.1974. Rule 201 reads as under:- "Rule 201 : Special provisions in respect of certain promotions:- All promotions of employees, who were in service of any Co-operative Society before the commencement of the Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Rules, 1988 issued under G.O.(MS)No.18/88 Co-op. dated the 17th day of June, 1988, made to any higher post or posts after the 1st day of January, 1974 and before the publication of the said rules in the Gazette shall be deemed to have been made in accordance with the provisions of Rules 185 and 200 as amended by the said Rules". From a plain reading of this Rule, it is evident that by virtue of this Rule, all promotions of employees, who were in service before 17.06.1988, made to any higher post, or posts after the 1st day of January, 1974, and before the publication of the amendment Rules, referred to above, shall be deemed to have been made in accordance with the provisions of Rules 185 & 200 as amended by the said Rules. Thus, buy virtue of this W.A. No. 534/2010 3 Rule, all promotions effected during the period from 01.01.1974 to 17.06.1988 are saved by this Rule. There is nothing in this Rule to indicate that the operation of this Rule is confined to those employees, who entered service prior to 01.01.1974, as mentioned in Ext.P4. This position is also clarified by this Court in Thankamani Amma v. Kerala State Co- operative Pension Board (2000(3)KLT Short Note 64, Case No.69).
4. I view of the above, necessarily, Ext.P4 needs to be quashed and I do so. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P1, in the light of this judgment, and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above." 2. The State is challenging the Judgment, on the ground that the decision taken by the Joint Registrar to decline exemption from qualification to the 1st respondent is correct and therefore the learned Single Judge ought not to have interfered with the decision of the 3rd respondent.
3. We have heard both sides. Rule 201 of the Kerala Co- Operative Societies Rules are not applicable for the purpose of deciding whether the 1st respondent is eligible for exemption from the qualification of Degree for the purpose of promotion. W.A. No. 534/2010 4 All what the learned Single Judge has done is to quash the order of the 3rd appellant on the ground that the Rule 201 relied on by him is not applicable to the fact situation and directing the 3rd respondent to reconsider the question of approval of Ext.P1 request for exemption from qualifications for the 1st respondent for promotion afresh in accordance with law. We do not find any infirmity whatsoever in the Judgment. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. Sd/- S.SIRI JAGAN,JUDGE Sd/- K.HARILAL, JUDGE sd