The government can prescribe different qualifications for posts within cooperative societies, and challenges to recruitment notifications must be made promptly.

BY ADVS.

SRI.M.A.ASIF, SC

SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC

SRI.IMAM GRIGORIOUS KARAT, SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2026, THE COURT ON 24.03.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

N. NAGARESH, J.

W.P.(C) No.48316 of 2025

Dated this the 24th day of March, 2026

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, who is an aspirant to the post of Regional Manager and Administrative Officer under the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank, has filed this writ petition seeking to declare that Rule 186(4) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 is invalid. The petitioner seeks to quash Exts.P4 and P5 notifications to the extent it prescribes JDC as additional qualifications along with MCom for appointment to the post of Administrative Officer and Regional Manager of the Bank.

2. The petitioner states that he possesses MCom in Business Finance and BCom with Co-operation as special subject. The Public Service Commission has issued Ext.P4 notification dated 03.08.2020 for direct recruitment to the post of Administrative Officer. Ext.P5 notification has been published for appointment to the post of Regional Manager through direct recruitment.

3. The petitioner states that rule making power for appointment to the said posts is vested with the Government as per Section 109 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Rule 186 framed in exercise of Section 109 prescribes qualifications for appointment. The petitioner states that the posts of Administrative Officer and Regional Manager would fall under Rule 185(3). As per Rule 186, a person having MCom is eligible for appointment to the post of Administrative Officer and Regional Manager at the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. The petitioner is therefore eligible for appointment.

4. However, in Exts.P4 and P5 notifications, an additional qualification of HDC/JDC is prescribed for applying for the said posts. The said prescription is illegal and arbitrary. Such additional qualification has been prescribed based on Ext.P6 Government Order dated 04.12.2018. Ext.P6 Government Order cannot override the provisions contained in the statutory rule. The Government cannot further delegate the power, contends the petitioner.

5. The examination for recruitment pursuant to Exts.P4 and P5 has been notified to be held on 14.01.2026. Unless this Court interferes in the matter, the petitioner will be put to hardship. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Company Limited and another v. Union of India and others [(2009) 16 SCC 569] to contend that validity of a subordinate legislation can be questioned on the ground of ultra vires the parent Act.

6. A Division Bench of this Court, in the judgment in Kerala Public Service Commission v. Neethu Surendran P.S. [2025 (2) KLT 236] has held that a Government Order prescribing qualifications different from that contained in the Special Rules, will be invalid. The petitioner also relied on the judgment in Janardhanan v. Joint Registrar [1990 (1) KLT 530] and urged that the power or authority must be exercised according to the mode provided and contemplated by the statutory provision. Other modes of performance are necessarily forbidden.

7. The 1st respondent-Bank resisted the writ petition. The 1st respondent submitted that as per Rule 187 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 50% of the direct recruitment vacancies in Apex Societies are to be filled from among the qualified employees of the primary Societies affiliated to the Apex Society. Therefore, vacancies earmarked for direct recruitment for the post of Administrative Officer and Regional Manager is to be filled in the ratio 1:1 between the general category and Society category.

8. The 1st respondent stated that in respect of posts to be filled by way of direct recruitment in the 1st respondent-Bank, the Bank is obliged to consult the Public Service Commiss