Kerala High Court
R.P.Thami vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2008
Author: T.R. Ramachandran Nair
Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP.No. 25339 of 2002(N)
1. R.P.THAMI, S/O. KOTHA,
... Petitioner
2. ALUR RAGHAVAN, S/O. SANKUNNI NAIR,
3. V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
4. VELUKUTTY, S/O. AYYAPPAN,
5. M.MOIDEEN, S/O. BAVUNNI MOOPAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
4. THE ASST. REGISTRAR OF CO-OP.SOCIETIES
5. THE MANGALAM SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.,
6. THE KURUMBATHOOR SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.
7. THE TANUR SERVICE CO-OP. BANK LTD.,
8. THE TIRUR SERVICE CO-OP.BANK LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
For Respondent :SPL.GOVT.PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :03/12/2008
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O.P. No.25339/2002-N
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners were employees of respondent Nos.5 to 8, Co-operative Societies. Out of the five petitioners, except fifth petitioner, all others have retired from service.
2. In accordance with the terms of Government Orders, they have been granted various monetary benefits and, as decided by the Managing Committee and approved by the Joint Registrar concerned. It is stated that proceedings were issued granting higher grade benefits by Ext.P1 issued by the Assistant Registrar (General), Tirur. But subsequently, defects were noticed in the orders granting the higher grade, and proceedings were issued by the Department directing recovery of excess amount from the petitioners. This Court by Ext.P3 judgment directed the Government to consider the matter and pass appropriate orders. Finally, by Ext.P4, the Government ordered cancellation of the proceedings of the Registrar effecting recovery from the petitioners and directed the managing committees of the respective co-operative banks to take appropriate decisions in the matter. Ext.P4 is under challenge in this original petition.
O.P. No.25339/2002-N -:2:-
3. Respondents have filed their counter affidavits. It is evident from the counter affidavits filed by the respective co-operative societies that after the Government Order was received, the matter was considered by the Managing Committees and decisions have been taken by them. In the counter affidavit filed by the seventh respondent in paragraph (7) it is stated that certain suggestions were made before the Managing Committee regarding the allotment of grades. One such suggestion is that if two new grades, i.e., one below the Senior Clerk and another below the Accountant are also allowed, it will be more beneficial to the employees. Managing Committee had forwarded all these suggestions to the Joint Registrar for approval. It is stated that steps are being taken from their part to grant higher grades to the employees.
4. In a counter affidavit filed by the fifth respondent bank also it is stated in paragraph (6) that the Director Board of the bank resolved to request the Assistant Registrar for granting higher grade to the first petitioner. Ext.R5(a) is the letter submitted before the fourth respondent in that regard.
5. Regarding the claim of the second petitioner the sixth respondent bank in their counter affidavit stated that the second petitioner is eligible for second higher grade promotion on 01/08/1997 and, having paid enhanced amounts to the employees towards higher grade, the bank is morally precluded from making any demand to the employees for the refund of entire amount received by them. O.P. No.25339/2002-N -:3:-
6. The fifth petitioner is working in the eighth respondent Tirur Service Co- operative Bank. In the counter affidavit filed by the above bank it is stated that having paid enhanced amount to the employees who had secured higher grade promotion, the bank is morally precluded from making any demand to the employees for the refund of extra amount received by them.
7. Therefore, a reading of the counter affidavits of the respective banks show that they have sympathetically considered the grievance of the petitioners and favourable decisions have been taken by them in accordance with the spirit of Ext.P4 Government Order. The petitioners who have been granted the benefits at the relevant time therefore, are not liable to refund any excess amount in view of the stand taken by the respective banks in the counter affidavits. Only thing is that appropriate orders will have to be passed by the Assistant Registrar/Joint Registrar concerned, in accordance with the request of the respective co-operative banks. Therefore, the original petition is disposed of directing the third and fourth respondents to pass appropriate orders as requested for by the Managing Committees of the banks in question in tune with the order passed by the Government in Ext.P4 directing the Societies not to recover any excess amount. If any of the petitioners have not received the benefit of higher grade, respondent Nos.5 to 8 shall disburse the same in tune with the orders passed by respondent Nos.3 and 4 as expeditiously as possible. Since petitioners 1 to 4 have already O.P. No.25339/2002-N -:4:- retired from service, the respondents 3 and 4 shall take up the matter and pass appropriate orders within five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The original petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms O.P. No.25339/2002-N -:5:- T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O.P. No.25339/2002-N ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J U D G M E N T 3r dD e c e m b e r , 2 0 0 8 .