The court affirmed the validity of employee terminations made due to improper classification of the cooperative bank and affirmed that disputes must be addressed through alternative remedies as provided in the relevant Act.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners in these three writ petitions are employees working as Part Time Sweepers, Night Watchmen, Peon, Attender, Salesman, etc. under the 5^th respondent-Mukkom Service Co-operative Bank Limited. The petitioners seek to direct respondents 4 and 5 to reinstate the petitioners in service immediately.

2. The petitioners state that the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies obtained a report from the Unit Inspector and Assistant Registrar and issued an order dated 28.12.2020 suspending the Managing Committee alleging irregularities. The Joint Registrar appointed an Administrative Committee removing the Administrator in office. The Administrative Committee issued a notice proposing to remove employees.

3. In W.P.(C) No.27113/2021, this Court found that keeping the elected members away from the office and allowing the Administrative Committee to continue in office is illegal, as per Ext.P6 judgment in W.P.(C) No.27113/2021 dated 04.12.2021. Consequently, the elected committee was restored to office with effect from 06.12.2021.

4. The elected committee initiated steps to appoint sub staff. By Ext.P8, the Joint Registrar required to stop the selection process. The Joint Registrar issued Ext.P12 order dated 19.07.2023 superseding the Committee. Ext.P12 order was challenged in W.P.(C) No.24870/2023. This Court set aside the supersession. The Joint Registrar again issued order dated 27.09.2023 superseding the Committee. The said order is challenged in W.P.(C) No.44021/2023 and the writ petition is pending.

5. The petitioners state that the Administrative Committee issued Exts.P13 and P14 notices dated 11.02.2025 informing that it is decided to terminate the service of the petitioners. The petitioners filed reply. The 4^th respondent, without considering the reply filed by the petitioners, have issued Exts.P19 and P20 orders terminating the service of the petitioners without stating any reason.

6. The petitioners state that the impugned termination orders are illegal. The selection process was following due process of law. The petitioners were appointed in the lower cadres against sanctioned posts. The appointments were made following due procedure. The Administrative Committee has no power to make appointments. They have no power to terminate the services of existing employees, contend the petitioners.

7. The respondents resisted the writ petition filing counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, the 5^th respondent stated that due to maladministration, misappropriation and illegal appointments, a vigilance case is registered against the erstwhile Board of Directors. Due to the maladministration of the erstwhile Board of Directors, huge loss was incurred to the Bank. In pursuance of the enquiry conducted, it was found that there were maladministration in the selection process and appointments. Since the erstwhile Board of Directors failed to fulfill the eligibility of Class I Special Grade status of the Bank, the 3^rd respondent-Joint Registrar has reclassified the Grade of the Bank as Class I. The writ petition is without any merit.

8. The 3^rd respondent also filed a counter affidavit. The 3^rd respondent submitted that the 5^th respondent- Co-operative Bank was earlier classified as Class I Special Grade. The Bank was not able to maintain the qualifications. Though the Bank failed to satisfy the criteria for classification as Class I Special Grade later, the then Committee did not take steps to reclassify the Bank. This was intended to make illegal appointments over and above the due staff pattern.

9. If there is any dispute between the Bank and the p