THOMAS KARAKKAVAYALIL Vs. REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is a member of the Managing Committee of the 3rd respondent, a Primary Agricultural Credit Co- operative Society. In this writ petition, he seeks to challenge Ext.P2, a notification issued by the respondent Bank for making appointments to two posts of Peons and one post of Salesman. The grounds on which the notification is challenged are that the financial position of the Society does not justify the proposed appointments that Ext.P2 notification is against the provisions contained in Circular 11/1999 issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and that the test is proposed to be held in violation of Ext.P5 circular which has interpreted by this Court in Ext.P6 judgment.

(2.) THIRD respondent Bank has filed a counter affidavit, in which, it has highlighted the necessity to make appointments to the vacant posts notified in Ext.P2. THIRD respondent further says that the petitioner himself was a party to Ext.R3 (a), minutes of the Board meeting resolving to fill up these posts but has chosen to challenge Ext.P2 for oblique motives consequent on his shifting of political loyalties.

(3.) AS far as Ext.P5 circular, which has been interpreted by this Court in Ext.P6 is concerned, the contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that written test is required to be conducted by an outside agency. It is also pointed out that in Ext.P6 judgment where the scope of the said circular was considered and this Court has held that the expression 'outside agency' occurring in Ext.P5 must be an agency of repute. This Court having laid down the manner in which the expression "outside agency" is to be understood, it is necessary that the 3rd respondent Bank should follow the same. True, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent has pointed out that W.A No.1881/2010 filed before this Court against Ext.P6 was heard and judgment is awaited.