JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.39752/2022, 85/2023] The petitioners, who participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Peon by "Vallappuzha Service Co-operative Bank Limited" ('Society', for short), allege that the selection processes undertaken, the Rank List prepared and the appointments made are mired in corruption, and have been done only to allow persons of their choice to be appointed.
2. In fact, the petitioner in W.P. (C)No.85/2023 had approached this Court earlier, by filing W.P.(C)No.38645/2022, in which this Court had considered the afore allegations; but noticing that the selection process had not been completed, permitted the Society to do so, but with an order that to make the appointments only seven days after the Rank List is published.
-5-
3. The petitioners assert that the afore direction of this Court has been violated; and that the persons whose names had been earlier cited by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.85/2023 - while he filed the aforementioned W.P. (C)No.38645/2022 - had now been appointed. They, therefore, assert that their allegations have now been fortified; and thus pray that the appointments of the party respondents in these cases be set aside.
4. I have heard Sri.C.M.Mohammed Iquabal - learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No. 85/2023; Sri.Haroon Rasheed - learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.39752/2022; Sri.P.N.Mohanan - learned Standing Counsel for the Society and Sri.S.Gopinadhan - learned Senior Government Pleader.
5. As I have said above, the petitioners in these two cases have made very serious
-6-
allegations against the recruitment process adopted by the Society. Since the allegations are common and the factual circumstances pleaded are analogous, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions together.
6. At the bedrock of all the allegations is that the Society had already identified the party respondents and had obtained illegal gratification from them, so as to offer appointments. They say that the factum of the said respondents alone having appointed through the process, after this Court permitted them to complete the selection process in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.38645/2022, proves their allegations without doubt.
7. Certain corollary allegations are also made, including that the petitioner in W.P. (C)No.39752/2022 was denied an opportunity to participate in the interview; and that the party
-7-
respondents were given additional opportunities of writing the written examination illegally, while being denied to others.
8. As expected, the Society denies all the afore allegations and says that the selection process was done properly. In fact, their learned Standing Counsel - Sri.P.N.Mohanan, argued that the allegations of the petitioners are self serving and is intended only to tarnish his client's reputation for questionable motives. He added that once the petitioners had taken part in the proceedings, it would not be possible for them to turn around and challenge it, when they found that they were not selected.
9. The afore rival contentions of the parties make it indubitable that the allegations made by the petitioners against the Society are in the factual realm, which cannot be considered by this Court while acting under Article 226 of
-8-
the Constitution of India, on account of the constraints of evaluation of facts and documents.
10. I am, therefore, of the firm view that petitioners must be given an opportunity to approach the competent Authority - which I feel is the Registrar of Co-operative Societies - with an apposite representation, so that all the allegations can be properly investigated and concluded upon, without any avoidable delay.
11. The appointment of the party respondents would not per se impede this, because the allegations of the petitioners had been made much earlier than their appointments; and which have been concluded by this Court in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.38645/2022 - a copy of which is on record as Ext.P7 along with W.P. (C)No.85/2023.
In the afore circumstances, I dispose of
-9-
these writ petitions, leaving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Registrar of Co-operative Societies with an appropriate representation, detailing all their allegations and claims against the appointments made by the Society; and if this is done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, same shall be considered by the said Authority, after affording necessary opportunities to both sides and after causing all requisite enquiries, including with the assistance of the Police and such other Investigating Agencies, as the case may be; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four months from the date on which said representations are received.
Needless to say, until such time as the
-10-
afore exercise is completed and the resultant order communicated to all sides, appointment of the party respondents in these cases shall be construed to be provisional and will be modulated depending upon the decision to be taken by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
akv
-12-
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R4 (A) A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION TO
THE BRANCH MANAGER DATED 14.12.2022
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO
PUBLISH THE RANK LISTIN THE NOTICE
BOARD
EXHIBIT R4 (B) A TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST DATED
14.12.2022 ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF
PUBLICATION DONE BY THE BRANCH
MANAGERS
EXHIBIT R4 (C) A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER
DATED 23.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE
PRESIDENT
EXHIBIT R4 (D) A TRUE COPY OF THE TABULATION OF MARKS
OF WRITTEN EXAMINATION AND INTERVIEW
DONE