IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 9881 of 2007(B)
1. JAYAKUMAR, ATTENDER, MURUNTHAL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. ASST.REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES
... Respondent
2. THE ASST.REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES
3. MURUNTHAL SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.NO.
For Petitioner :SRI.P.N.MOHANAN
For Respondent :SRI.R.SREEHARI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :29/03/2007
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P(C) No. 9881 of 2007
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 29th March, 2007.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner and additional 4th respondent are
employees of the 3rd respondent- Bank. Both of them
applied to the Bank for sending them to undergo the
course of Junior Diploma in Co-operation (in short ‘J.D.C.’)
which is of ten months’ duration without benefit of salary
for the period of course. By Ext.P2 resolution, the bank
decided to send the petitioner for the course. Although, in
Ext.P2 resolution, the application by the 4th respondent
was also mentioned, the bank did not take any decision
either way in respect of his application. Accordingly, the
bank counter signed Ext.P3 application filed by the
petitioner. The same was forwarded to the first and
second respondents for certificates to be signed in the
form itself as certificate Nos.II and III. However, the
respondents 1 and 2 refused to issue certificates as
requested by the petitioner. It is, under the above
circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court
W.P.(C) No.9881 OF 2007
2
seeking the following reliefs:-
” i) issue a writ of mandamus
or other appropriate writ, order or
direction, directing the respondents 1
and 2 to issue certificates 2 and 3 in
Ext.P3 application form forthwith if the
particular furnished by the petitioner is
correct.
ii) grant such other relief as
this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The learned Government Pleader, on the strength
of the counter affidavit stated to have been filed by him,
which does not find a place in the case records, but a copy
of which has been made available across the bar, submits
that the petitioner is not a regular employee of the 3rd
respondent-bank and therefore he is not entitled to be
sent for JDC course. The reason is that the bank
appointed the petitioner as an Attender by category
change from that of Salesman, to which he was appointed
and that appointment alone was approved. The category
change granted by the 3rd respondent- Bank was refused
to be approved by the Joint Registrar. In the above
W.P.(C) No.9881 OF 2007
3
circumstances, the petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No.27916
of 2006 in which there is an order of stay. The reasoning
of the Govt. Pleader is that now petitioner is appointed as
an Attender for which there is no approval. Therefore, the
petitioner cannot be considered as a regular employee of
the bank is the submission made by the Government
Pleader.
3. The additional 4th respondent has also filed a
counter affidavit and strongly opposes the claim of the
petitioner. He submits that it was pursuant to a complaint
filed by him that respondents 1 and 2 have refused to
issue the required certificates to the petitioner. He would
submit that he had also applied for sending him for the
course which is evident from Ext.P2 resolution and as
such there was no reason for refusing permission to him
for going for the course. He, therefore, submits that
without sending him also for the course the petitioner shall
not be allowed to attend the course.
4. I have heard the learned counsel on both sides
in detail.
W.P.(C) No.9881 OF 2007
4
5. Along with the reply affidavit, the petitioner has
produced Ext.P5 order by which the petitioner was
appointed as Salesman in the society. That appointment
was approved by the Joint Registrar, by Ext.P6 order, by
which order itself the appointment of the additional 4th
respondent has also been approved. By Ext.P7 order,
the third respondent declared probation of the petitioner
as well as the additional 4th respondent in the posts of
Salesman and Peon, respectively. Ext.P8 is the seniority
list of employees of the 3rd respondent society in which
the petitioner appears at serial number 9 and the 4th
respondent at serial number 10. Exts. P5 and P8 are not
disputed by anybody before me. In fact in Ext.P8, the
additional 4th respondent has also signed accepting the
seniority position in the list. Now with regard to the
dispute as to whether the petitioner is entitled to
category change or not as an Attender is pending
consideration before this Court in another Writ Petition.
Even assuming that the category change cannot be
approved, the only consequence would be that the
W.P.(C) No.9881 OF 2007
5
petitioner would have to go back to the post of
salesman. Of course, the additional 4th respondent would
contend that the post of salesman is no longer available
in the bank on account of change of category of bank in
support of which there is no material before me. I am
also not inclined to consider the same in this Writ Petition
since nobody has a case that Ext.P6 has been cancelled or
that the petitioner’s appointment to the post as Salesman
has been cancelled. Therefore it cannot be disputed that
either as Salesman or as Attender, the petitioner is a
regular employee of the 3rd respondent-bank. As such he
cannot be denied an opportunity to attend the JDC course
on the ground now mentioned in the counter affidavit of
respondents 1 and 2. Whatever that be, for the purpose
of sending of JDC course it is totally irrelevant whether
the petitioner is a salesman or attender.
6. The additional 4th respondent would contend
that when both himself and petitioner had applied, it
was not just to allow the petitioner alone to attend the
course. I am of the opinion that this is a matter which
W.P.(C) No.9881 OF 2007
6
the additional 4th respondent would have taken up with
the bank and the Joint Registrar in appropriate
proceedings. For that reason, I do not think that the
respondents 1 and 2 can refuse to give certificates for
which the petitioner has applied for and the 3rd
respondent bank has recommended. Accordingly, I direct
respondents 1 and 2 to issue necessary certificates
namely, Certificate Nos.2 and 3 in Ext.P3. This shall be
done immediately on production of a certified copy of this
judgment so that the petitioner can apply for the post
tomorrow itself, which is stated to be the last date for such
application.
The Writ Petition is allowed.
Issue certified copy of this Judgment today itself.
Sd/-
S. Siri Jagan, Judge
jp
///TRUE COPY///
P.A. TO JUDGE.