SINDHU S.V. Vs. THE GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in W.P.(C). No. 21222 of 2013 are employees of various Handloom Weavers Co -operative Societies, as classified under Rule 15 of the Kerala Co -operative Societies Rules, 1969 [for brevity "KCS Rules"] at item No. 5 under the heading "Producers Society". The Weavers Societies so formed are members of and are affiliated to the District Co -operative Banks. As far as such Societies are concerned, specifically Weavers Societies, they are precluded from the supervisory powers conferred on the Registrar of the Co -operative Department. With respect to such Societies, the Registrar as indicated in Section 3, the Government has notified the Director of District Industries Centre [for brevity "DIC"] to be their Registrar. Hence, all functions of the Registrar under the KCS Act, with respect to such Weavers Co -operative Societies who are not under the supervisory jurisdiction of the Co -operative Department, would come under the supervision of the Registrar notified under Section 3 of the Act. The petitioners are all employees of the various Handloom Weavers' Co -operative Societies who are affiliated to the 2nd respondent -Bank.

(2.) THE Kerala Public Service Commission [hereinafter referred to as "PSC"] came out with a notification calling for appointments to the posts in the respondent -Bank, wherein a reservation of 50% was granted to the Primary/Member Societies as per Rule 187 of the KCS Rules. A controversy arose as to the eligibility of the employees of the Weavers Societies to participate in such selection and get selected to such posts notified by the PSC. The petitioners had all applied for the selection notified by the PSC, the rank list of which is produced as Exhibit P11 in W.P.(C). No. 18646 of 2012. But for this, all the other documents are those produced in W.P.(C). No. 21222 of 2013, which is taken as the leading case.

(3.) IT is also pointed out that a similar issue arose earlier, and by Exhibit P11 judgment, the issue was answered in favour of the employees of such Weavers Societies. Therein also, the specific contention raised was that the petitioner therein, who was a member of the Weavers Co -operative Society, was appointed without approval and there was no approved staff pattern in the Society. The learned Single Judge who disposed of Exhibit P11, considered the issue and found that the experience of the petitioner therein was sufficient so as to enable the petitioner to participate in the selection. There was nothing to show that the petitioner's appointment was irregular. In such circumstance, a direction was issued to the Deputy Registrar, DIC to issue experience certificate as contemplated in the notification. The petitioner therein is identically situated as the petitioners herein.