Kerala High Court
Praveenchandran P. And Ors. vs State Of Kerala And Anr. on 5 December, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2008(1)KLJ417, 2008(1)KLT478
Author: Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
Bench: Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
1. Petitioners are accountants in the service of the second respondent Co-operative Bank, the Board of which resolved to request the Government to exempt the petitioners from possessing graduation as an educational qualification. That was rejected by Ext. P7. Hence, this writ petition.
2. According to the petitioners, though by Exts. P4 and P5 series documents, exemption has been granted to the Bank from the provisions of Item (u) Clause (b) of Sub-rule 8 of Rule 185 and Sub-rule 1 of Rule 186 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, hereinafter referred to as the "Rules", the Government adopted a pick and choose policy by limiting the benefit of Exts. P4 and P5 series, to the employee named in those orders. They accordingly contend that Ext. P7 refusing to grant exemption in exercise of authority under Rule 181 is unsustainable. Having regard to the nature of the contentions, the matter was adjourned on 12-11 -2007 for the department to place counter affidavit, if needed. But, that is not placed.
3. By Exts. P4 and P4 series of documents, the Government have, in exercise of power under Rule 181, exempted the society from the provision of Rule 185(8)(b) (u). However, the Government made that order as if that exemption is for the purpose of the beneficiaries who are named in those orders.
4. Rule 185(8)(b) of the Rules, as it now stands, provides certain conditions to be satisfied, for granting relaxation to individuals, from acquiring the qualification referred to in that provision. There is no power in that Rule to grant exemption from the conditions which are required to be satisfied for the purpose of granting exemption invoking that provision. After placing Rule 185 in the format in which it is, the power to grant exemption in individual cases is made available with the Registrar subject to the conditions imposed by that provision.
5. In terms of Rule 181, the Government have the power to grant exemption to any registered society or class of societies from any of the provisions of the Rules. That power is to grant exemption for the institution as such, i.e., the society or to a class of societies. That rule is not one, whereby the Government can meddle with individual cases of employees. Therefore, the Government cannot pick and choose between different employees of a co-operative society while making an order of exemption under Rule 181. If the Government concludes, as has been done as per Ext. P4 order, that the society is entitled to exemption under Rule 181, there is no reason why the benefit of that exemption shall not be available to all the employees of that society. When the Government have exercised power under Rule 181 and exempted the society from the provisions of Rule 185(8)(b)(u), such relaxation applies to the institution, i.e., the society and not to any individual employee. Therefore, Exts. P4 and P5 series decisions, whereby the Government made those orders as if the exemption granted thereby is for the purpose of the employees named in those orders, can be treated only as an order of exemption to the institution, the society, and not an order of exemption confined to be in favour of the employees mentioned therein. Hence, the benefit of the decision contained in Exts. P4 and P5 series granting exemption, would inure to the benefit of all the employees of that establishment, including the petitioners.
6. In the result, this writ petition is allowed quashing Ext. P7 and declaring that the petitioners are entitled to be considered for promotion as managers on the basis of the exemption from the provisions of Rule 185(8)(b)(u) as has been granted to the second respondent Bank, as per Exts. P4 and P5 series orders of the Government, issued in exercise of authority under Rule 181 of the rules, since the decision of the society to promote the petitioners as managers is essentially contained in the resolution of the committee requesting grant of exemption, it is declared that the petitioners are entitled to be considered to the post of manager from the date of that resolution. No costs.