IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 8899 of 2007(H)
1. PATTANAKKAD COIR MATS AND MATTING
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DIRECTOR OF COIR DEVELOPMENT,
... Respondent
2. THE PROJECT OFFICER (COIR),
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :06/11/2007
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(c).No. 8899 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 6th day of November, 2007
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this court on the following brief
allegations.
Petitioner is a Co-operative Society. It is the only society
with net profit of Rs. 15 lakhs during 98 to 2006. Pursuant to
the enquiry proceedings, former employee of the society
Sri.V.R.Ratnappan was dismissed from the service of the society
in 2002 with effect from the date of suspension. It is further
stated that V.R. Retnappan filed a complaint before the Minister
alleging that he has not allowed to be reinstated pursuant to the
direction of the Labour Court. The Minister who is impleaded in
the personal capacity as additional third respondent without
obtaining any reply from the petitioner directed the second
respondent to order enquiry under Section 66 of the Act. Second
respondent by order dated 12/01/2006 (Ext.P2) directed the
Arbitrator-Sale Officer, Project Office (Coir), Alappuzha to have an
inspection of the financial affairs between the society and the
WPC No.8899/07 2
former employee V.R. Retnappan and the enquiry is still pending.
It is the case of the petitioner that former secretary upon getting
employment in the state service resigned from the society and
now a member of the society is acting in-charge of the Secretary.
Vacancy was notified and Coir Project Officer accorded sanction
for conducting a test for the appointment of Secretary of the
petitioner. Applications were invited and the written test was
scheduled to be held on 22.02.2007. In the meantime, four
members of the society submitted a complaint before the Minister
stating that V.R. Retnappan was not reinstated in service and he
is also entitled to get the post of Secretary and therefore
requested to stop the recruitment proceedings for the
appointment of Secretary to the petitioner. The third respondent ,
by order dated 21/02/2007 directed the respondent to stop all
recruitment processes since enquiry under Section 66 has been
commenced.
2. The main contention of the petitioner is that the
Minister has absolutely no authority in law to interfere with
recruitment process. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the
WPC No.8899/07 3
decision of the Full Bench in Aji v. State of Kerala (1995(1)KLT
363) to contend that there is total absence of jurisdiction with the
Minister to interfere with the recruitment process. Petitioner
further contends that no powers are available with the Minister to
pass the impugned order. I find that there is considerable merit in
the contention of the petitioner that the third respondent had no
authority to interfere with the matter as he has done and the
impugned order is liable to be quashed. In such circumstances,
the direction of the third respondent being found bereft of any
legal authority, the impugned endorsement by him in Ext.P3 is
quashed.
Writ petition is allowed as above.
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
sv.
WPC No.8899/07 4