Manuel Mathew v. The Kalloorkad Farmers Co-Operative Bank Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 27615 of 2015 (B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS : - -----------------------

1. MANUEL MATHEW, SENIOR CLERK AT PRESENT WORKING AS CASHIER, KALLOORKAD FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2605, KALLOORKAD P.O., PIN - 686 668, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

2. K.J.PONNACHAN, JUNIOR CLERK, WORKING AS BRANCH MANAGER IN CHARGE, KALOOR BRANCH, KALLOORKAD FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2605., KALLOORKAD P.O., PIN - 686 668, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.D.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS : - --------------------------

1. THE KALLOORKAD FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.2605, KALLOORKAD P.O., PIN - 686 668, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR IN CHARGE.

2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERTATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 024.

3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THRIUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

5. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE KALLOORKAD FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.2605, KALLOORKAD P.O., PIN - 686 668, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT.

6. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EXAMINATION BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PIN -695001. R1 & 5 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY R1 & 5 BY ADV. SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH R6 BY ADV. SMT.RASHMI. K.V., SC, CO.OP. SERVICE EXAMINATION BOARD BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. G. GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DMR/-

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 27615 of 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2015

JUDGMENT

It is reported that the petitioners have already filed ARC No.61/2015 before the Arbitration Court, Trivandrum. Since parallel proceedings cannot be maintained, the learned counsel for the petitioners has intended to withdraw the writ petition with a leave of this Court, so that the petitioners could approach this Court once again based on the outcome of the arbitration proceedings.

2. It is made clear that if at all the petitioners intend to pursue further based on the outcome of the arbitration case, it is entirely open for them to take recourse to statutory measures under Section 69 or any other relevant provision of the Act. It needs no express leave from this Court. Accordingly, this Court dismisses the writ petition as having been withdrawn.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-