Ext.P6 order as per which the request made by the 4th respondent society to exempt the petitioner from acquiring JDC qualification stands rejected by the 1st respondent. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The brief facts are as under:

The petitioner states that he joined the services of the 4th respondent as a Peon on 01.08.1997 and he was promoted as an Attender from 01.08.2011. According to him, though he is designated as an Attender, he has been discharging all the duties in the Bank including that of the Cashier. He contends that he has passed 10 A level equivalency examination which qualifies him to promotion to the post of Cashier. Considering his hard work, experience and excellent relationship with the customers, the Bank took a decision to promote the petitioner as a Cashier. However, they were not in a position to do so, as the relevant statutory provisions stipulate that a person to be eligible for promotion should have JDC qualification. In the said circumstances, the 4th respondent submitted Ext.P1 request before the 1st respondent to exempt the petitioner from acquiring JDC in exercise of powers under Rule 181(c) of the Rules. Immediately thereafter, the 3rd respondent has also issued Ext.P2 addressed to the 2nd respondent intimating the said authority that the 4th respondent has requested to exempt the petitioner from acquiring the JDC qualification, as otherwise he cannot be promoted as Junior Cashier. The petitioner asserts that in similar circumstances, two attenders of the Bank had approached this Court seeking to consider their request from exemption and by Ext.P3 judgment this Court had directed to reconsider the question of exemption of the petitioners from acquiring the qualification. It is contended that the Government by Ext.P4 order considered the request of the said employees and granted exemption to them from acquiring educational qualification for the post of Junior Cashier. According to the petitioner, he is similarly placed as the persons who were granted exemption as per Ext.P4 order. The petitioner contends that the request made by the petitioner was rejected by the 1st respondent by a cryptic order dated 02.05.2016. The said order was challenged before this Court and by Ext.P5 judgment, this Court taking note of the fact that the order is bereft of reasons directed fresh consideration of the exemption request. The petitioner states that the 1st respondent without properly considering the request for exemption rejected the same by Ext.P6 order.

The said order is under challenge.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent. It is stated as per Rule 185(1) of the Act, the promotion of any category of employees is conferred by strictly adhering to the feeder category sub-rules approved by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The feeder category sub-rules of the 4th respondent clearly states that the feeder category of Clerk/Cashier are Typists, Attender, Peon. It also provides that the qualification for the post of Clerk/ Cashier is SSLC and JDC. For promotion from sub staff posts to clerical posts, the employee concerned is required to have co-operative training qualification over and above the academic qualification. The petitioner in the instant case has only 10 A level equivalency qualification. It is contended that as per Rule 185 (8)(c) of the Co-operative Societies Rules, the feeder category employees are to acquire co-operative training qualifications for being conferred with promotion and no exemption can be granted. It is further stated that the co-operative sector requires innovative and trained staff to run a co-operative society and it is with a view to improve the efficiency that the successful completion of a short term training programme is being insisted with. Insofar as the benefits granted to similar employees are concerned, it is submitted that the Co- operative Societies Rules, 1969 was amended and Sub Rule (2) relating to the