Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C.V. MARKOSE, CHEMBANKUZHI MATTATHIL versus THE PAMPADY SERVICE CO

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C.V. MARKOSE, CHEMBANKUZHI MATTATHIL v. THE PAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE - WP(C) No. 2563 of 2005(E) [2007] RD-KL 6815 (2 April 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 2563 of 2005(E)

1. C.V. MARKOSE, CHEMBANKUZHI MATTATHIL,
... Petitioner

2. K.V. SUKUMARAN, KAIYHAMATTAM,

3. KOMALAVALLIYAMMA, USHUS,

Vs

1. THE PAMPADY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE

4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

5. NINAN. V. ABRAHAM, VELLIANKUNNEL HOUSE

For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU

For Respondent :SRI.P.N.MOHANAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :02/04/2007

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)Nos.2563 & 806 OF 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 2nd day of April 2007



JUDGMENT

The issue raised in these writ petitions is whether the petitioner/Service Co-operative Bank is entitled to have 31 posts. The member of the Bank contented that the revised classification having come into effect in 1992 itself, the Bank was not entitled to have 31 posts. The stand taken by the Bank and the beneficiary employees was that the revised classification was introduced only with effect from 3.4.1998 and hence they are entitled to have the benefit of pre-revised norms in the matter of classification. It is seen that at the instance of the party respondent the matter was examined by this court leading to Ext.P5 judgment in O.P.6538/02. This court in the judgment set aside the order passed by the Government on the only ground that there was no material available and there was no finding by the Government regarding the introduction of the revised norms with effect from 3.4.1998. W.P.(C)Nos.2563 & 806 OF 2005 2 To quote,

"I am prima facie satisfied that the classification introducing revised norms in 1992 was implemented in 1992 itself. The finding that the same was implemented only on 3..1998, is not supported by any material. Therefore, Ext.P4 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the Government for determination of the above disputed point, after hearing the petitioner and the 4th respondent in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment."

2. The consequential order dated 4.11.04 passed by the Government is under challenge. The stand of the Government is that "it is true that the revised norms were made effective only from 3.4.98." On the basis of the above finding, there is hardly any scope for the Government to go farther on the issue and consider the matter on merits since all those aspects are covered by Ext.P5 judgment referred to above. The limited jurisdiction available to the Government as per Ext.P5 judgment is only to examine the date of application of the revised norms. The Government having found that the norms were introduced only on 3.4.1998, the inevitable W.P.(C)Nos.2563 & 806 OF 2005 3 consequential order that should have been passed is only to uphold the order passed by the Joint Registrar.

3. I quash the impugned orders. Bank shall be entitled to have the benefit of pre-revised amounts in the matter of classification and hence Ext.P1 is restored. It is declared that the petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of Ext.P1 order dated 12.12.97. Writ petitions are disposed of.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE

jes


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.