Ramachandran Nair, J.

Writ Appeal is filed by respondents 3,5,6 and 7 in the W.P.(C) challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge declaring Ext.P4 provisional order of promotion and Ext.P7 approval by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies granting exemption from degree for promotion, as invalid and issued in violation of Rule 185(8) of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Rules, 1969(hereinafter called "the Rules"). We have heard Adv. Sri.George Poonthottam appearing for the appellants, Senior counsel Sri.Nandakumara Menon, appearing for the additional 7th respondent, Government Pleader appearing for the 4th respondent and Standing Counsel appearing for the 5th respondent. Strangely respondents 1 to 3 in the Writ Appeal who were the petitioners in the W.P.(C) have not chosen to appear or defend the judgment inspite of notice.

2. The facts leading to the dispute raised before the learned Single Judge are the following. The appellants along with 6th respondent and three others joined the service of the 5th respondent- Bank without the qualification of Degree but wit SSLC and Junior Diploma Course in Co-operation. After serving for over 25 years, the 5th respondent-Bank taking into account their longstanding blemishless service in the Bank, decided to waive requirement of Degree as a qualification for promotion and recommended to the Registrar for approval in terms of Rule 185(2), the then existing Rule providing for relaxation of qualification of Society employees for promotion. Even though the said recommendation made through resolution of the Bank was not produced in the case of all the employees involved, one such recommendation is produced in the W.P.(C) as Ext.P3. After the Bank decided to relax the educational qualification of the appellants and others by way of dispensing with Degree as a qualification for promotion to the post of Branch Manager/Superintendent, the appellants and the other persons involved were promoted temporarily vide Ext.P4 proceedings dated 19.4.2003. On the very same day i.e. 19.4.2003, the Registrar referred the recommendation of the Bank for report by the Joint Registrar and based on his report and after considering the recommendation of the Bank, the Registrar vide Ext.P7 order dated 19.11.2003 approved the waiver of qualification namely, dispensation of Degree for promotion to the appellants with a rider that the promotions, if any, given prior to the Registrar's order will take effect from the date of approval granted by him i.e. 19.11.2003. Respondents 1 to 3 in the Writ Appeal who were graduates waiting for promotion, challenged Exts.P4 and P7 before this court on the ground that relaxation of educational qualification which is in the form of dispensation of degree as a qualification for promotion by the 5th respondent and the promotion given to appellants and the 6th respondent is against Rule 185(2) subsequently substituted by Rule 185 (8) of the Rules. Even though approval given by the Registrar for relaxation of educational qualification under Ext.P7 was for 8 persons, challenge was limited to the promotion given to appellants and the 6th respondent. The 7th respondent, though had not challenged the promotions given to petitioners in the W.P.(C), got impleaded as an additional respondent in this Writ Appeal to sustain the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The short question arising for our decision is whether the learned Single Judge was correct on the interpretation given by him on Rule 185(2) in as much as he has held that the relaxation of educational qualification by the Bank should itself be initiated with the prior approval of the Registrar. In order to consider the question, we have to necessarily refer to the Rule which stood at the relevant time, which is as follows:

"R.185(2) It shall be competent for the committee of a society to relax the qualifications of an employee, whether appointed before or after the commencement of these rules, for the purpose of p