High Court Kerala High Court

Sheeja Kumari vs General Manager on 24 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Sheeja Kumari vs General Manager on 24 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6055 of 2010(F)


1.  SHEEJA KUMARI ,KULAHIL KARA  VEEDU
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SREE VELLAYANI HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OP

                        Vs



1. GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE GENERAL

3. THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PATTOM

                For Petitioner  :SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM

                For Respondent  :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :24/06/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                  -------------------------
                  W.P.(C.) No.6055 of 2010 (F)
            ---------------------------------
              Dated, this the 24th day of June, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The 1st petitioner joined the services of the 2nd petitioner

society as a Clerk with effect from 01/07/1995. Ext.P5 dated

25/06/1995 is the order of appointment. She is a Graduate in Co-

operation.

2. While continuing in that post, pursuant to a notification

issued by the Public Service Commission inviting applications for the

post of Clerk in the District Co-operative Bank,

Thiruvananthapuram, to which 50% seats are reserved for

employees of affiliated societies, the petitioner submitted an

application. She was called for a written test and was included in

Ext.P1 short list.

3. She was required to produce a certificate to the effect

that she had three years experience. Thereupon she made an

application to the 2nd petitioner Society to issue a certificate as

required by the PSC. By Ext.P2, the the 2nd petitioner Society has

WP(C) No.6055/2010
-2-

resolved to request the 1st respondent to issue the certificate.

Exts.P3 & P4 show that the Co-operative Inspector recommended to

issue the certificate, and in fact sought orders approving the

appointment of the 1st petitioner as well. There was no progress in

the matter of issuance of experience certificate and that led the

petitioner to file this writ petition.

4. Pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the

1st petitioner was provisionally included by the PSC in Part.II of

Ext.P11 ranked list at serial No.46. Although the interim order also

required the 1st & 2nd respondents to pass orders on the request

made by the 1st petitioner for the experience certificate, learned

counsel for the petitioners complain that so far no orders have been

passed.

5. A statement has been filed on behalf of 1st respondent.

According to the 1st respondent, it was for want of details to prove

that the 1st petitioner’s appointment was in accordance with

Appendix III of Co-operative Societies Rules, such as appointment

order from the Managing Committee, selection list approved by the

Committee, minutes of the Society appointing the 1st petitioner, the

WP(C) No.6055/2010
-3-

said respondent could not pass orders on the request for issuance

of the experience certificate.

6. Irrespective of the inadequacies pointed out by the 1st

respondent in the statement filed, from Ext.P7 service book of the

1st petitioner, it is evident that the 1st petitioner is working in the 2nd

petitioner Society on permanent basis from 01/07/1995 onwards.

Ext.P8, the acquittance roll, shows that she has been on the rolls of

the Society as stated by her. There is absolutely no dispute on the

part of the 2nd petitioner about the correctness of the claim made by

the 1st petitioner. Therefore, it is obvious that the 1st petitioner has

been in the permanent employment of the 2nd petitioner since

01/07/1995. The request made to the 2nd respondent is only to

issue an experience certificate to the effect that the 1st petitioner

has three years experience and the documents produced by the

petitioners in this Court prove the fact that she has been working in

the 2nd petitioner Society since 1995.

7. Since this Court is satisfied that the 1st petitioner has

acquired the experience for the period applied for, this writ petition

is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to issue an experience

WP(C) No.6055/2010
-4-

certificate certifying that the 1st petitioner has three years

experience as a Clerk in the 2nd petitioner Society. The certificate

shall be issued as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two

weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before

the 2nd petitioner for compliance.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg