IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 37520 of 2009(H)
1. V.VASUMATHY, W/O.ARAVINDAKSHAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,
... Respondent
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER,
3. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
4. THE CONVENOR,
5. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
6. SMT.T.R.SHAILA,
For Petitioner :SRI.ANIL THOMAS(T)
For Respondent :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :08/02/2010
O R D E R
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.37520 of 2009
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of February, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who was working as a Manager of the
Ayyanthole Branch of the first respondent, has approached
this Court complaining that she is being harassed and not
permitted to work peacefully in her post. She has made a
number of allegations in the Writ Petition against the
second respondent who is alleged to be the person behind
the harassment of the petitioner. During the pendency of
the Writ Petition, by Ext.P10 order dated 19.1.2010, the
petitioner has been transferred to the Irinjalakkuda
Branch. Though she has been posted as a Manager, the
petitioner complains that there is already a Manager there
and since there is already a Manager posted there, she
would not be able to work there peacefully as a Manager.
According to the petitioner, there are 8 other Branches in
Thrissur District where Senior Accountants are holding
charge of the post of Manager. Therefore, the petitioner
could have been posted to any one of the said places
wpc No.37520/2009 2
without causing any inconvenience. According to the
petitioner, it is only due to the malafides of the second
respondent that she has not been posted to a suitable
place to hold independent charge as the Manager of a
branch.
2. The counsel for the first respondent on the other
hand refers to Ext.P10 to submit that the said proceedings
already contain instructions bifurcating the functions of
the Branch Manager in all branches where there is a
Senior Manager and Manager. Therefore, according to
the counsel, there is no reason for any problem or
confusion in Ext.P10.
3. It is conceded by the counsel for the petitioner
that the subject matter of this Writ Petition is one that
could be resolved by resorting to the remedy available
under Section 69 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.
The petitioner has no objection in taking recourse to the
said remedy for redressing her grievances.
4. The counsel for the first respondent on the other
hand contends that there are no grievances for the
petitioner to be agitated under Section 69 of the Act. I do
wpc No.37520/2009 3
not propose to go into the said question in this Writ
Petition.
5. In the light of the above submissions, this Writ
Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to seek
redressal of her grievances in the said Writ Petition by
taking recourse to the remedy provided by Section 69 of
the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN,
JUDGE
css/