IMPORTANT POINTS:
" The Bank finds it impossible to comply with certain specific provisions of the Act and the Rules, but can still act in consonance with law by obtaining exemption from the rigor of such provisions of Section 101.
" 2nd respondent-Bank has a liberty to act appositely in terms of the KCS Act and if they are so interested, to adopt necessary resolution seeking exemption from Rule 185(1) of the KCS Rules and thereafter move the competent Authority of the Government of Kerala, under the mandate of Section 101 of the KCS Act; in which event, the said Authority will consider the same in terms of law.

1. The nuances of the doctrine of necessity is juxtaposed with the imperative statutory prescriptions of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act and the Rules under it, in this writ petition; the pleadings of which, present the attempt of a Co-operative Society to effect appointments to certain posts by direct recruitment, when admittedly such posts are statutorily reserved to be filled up only by promotion, on the assertion that there are no qualified and eligible employees for being so promoted; thus predicating that they are entitled to resort to direct recruitment on account of dire and absolute necessity.

2. However, certain employees of the Society appear to object to this, impelling them to approach this Court through this writ petition.

3. A woodcut of the facts first:

4. The petitioners are stated to be the employees of the 2nd respondent - Kizhuvilam Service Co-operative Bank Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Bank for short), and submit that petitioners 1 to 3 are working as Senior Clerks; while petitioners 4 and 5 as Junior Clerk and Bill Collector respectively.

5. The petitioners impugn Ext.P2 notification, issued by the 3rd respondent-Co-operative Service Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as 'Board' for short), as per which, certain vacancies in the posts of Secretary, Chief Accountant and Branch Manager of the Bank have been sought to be filled up through direct recruitment.

6. The petitioners allege that neither could the Bank approach the Board for this purpose nor could the Board have issued Ext.P2 notification, going by the statutory stipulations in Rule 185(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules ('KCS' Rules for short), which mandates that the posts enumerated therein can be filled up only through promotion and in no other manner. The petitioners assert that it is conceded even by the Bank that the posts of Secretary, Chief Accountant and Branch Manager are ones coming within the confines of Rule 185(1) of the KCS Rules and consequently, that the attempt of the Bank to fill up those posts through direct recruitment, under the aegis of the Board, is illegal and unlawful. They, therefore, pray that the Bank be interdicted from filling up these vacancies, save through promotions and the Board be directed, axiomatically, not to proceed further with the selection to those posts under Ext.P2 notification.

7. I have heard Sri. N. Nandakumara Menon, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri. P.K. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Sri. T.R. Harikumar, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Bank; Smt. S.L. Sylaja, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent-Co-operative Service Examination Board and Sri. Bimal K. Nath, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1, 4 and 6.

8. When I hear Sri. N. Nandakumara Menon, the learned Senior Counsel, who makes submissions on behalf of the petitioners on the lines afore recorded, it is ineluctable that, in its crux, the petitioners' primary contention is that when Rule 185(1) of the KCS Rules prohibits filling up of vacancies in the posts enumerated therein, except by way of promotions, the Bank cannot seek to fill up those vacancies through direct recruitment or through any other method, in contravention of the stipulations in the said Rule.

9. In answer to the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel as afore, Sri.T.R.Harikumar, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Bank, submits that they were constrained to approach the Board, seeking initiation of the process to fill up these vacancies through direct recruitment because, none of the employees of the Bank including the petitioners, are in the feeder category, entitled to promotion to any of the posts sought to be filled up through Ext.P2, notification nor are they qualified to claim such promotion. He says that the Bank, therefore, was perforce in adopting a resolution, na