WP(C) Nos. 19203/2020, 20591/2020 and 21370/2020, In the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam (Renjith V.R. vs State of Kerala & others; George Batson vs State of Kerala & others; Sabarish, Pramod Chandran & Bisanth.K vs Ernakulam Regional Co-Operative Milk Producers Union & others)
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Amit Rawal
- Judgment Date
- 2021-06-29
- Court Decision / Holding
- Writ petitions dismissed for lack of maintainability; liberty granted to petitioners to pursue remedies under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The court notes that there is no basis to issue orders directing selection at this belated stage and that the matter falls within the Act’s remedial framework.
- Final Disposition
- Dismissed
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Renjith V.R.
- George Batson
- Sabarish
- Pramod Chandran
- Bisanth K.
Respondents
- State of Kerala represented by the Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, Thiruvananthapuram
- Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (KCMMF) Limited
- Managing Director, KCMMF Limited
- Ernakulam Regional Co-operative Milk Producers Union (ERCMPU) Limited
- National Diary Development Board (NDDB) Region Head (CS)
- Director, Dairy Development Department
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Anesh Paul
- • Sreejith S. Nair
- • B. Renjithkumar
Counsels for Respondents
- • V.M. Krishna Kumar
- • Latha Anand
- • N.S. Dayasindhu
- • Shree Hari
- • B Harish Kumar
- • Renjith Thampan
- • N.L. Bitto
Case Synopsis & Summary
The judgment addresses three writ petitions challenging the rank lists published for specific posts under the Kerala Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation framework, namely Plant Attender Grade III and Technician (Boiler Grade II). The petitioners allege illegality, arbitrariness, and denial of natural justice in the recruitment process and seek quashing of the rank lists, along with directions for publishing answer keys, marks, and preliminary lists. In WP(C) No. 20591/2020, it is contended that no rank list has been published, but the petitioner seeks access to examination materials. The arguments foreground concerns about fairness, due process, and compliance with circulars and regulations governing the recruitment. Before arguments, respondents raise a maintainability objection referencing a Full Bench decision, Association of Milma Officers v. State of Kerala, suggesting writ petitions against cooperative societies are only tenable for statutory violations or public-duty breaches, with a statutory remedy under Section 69(2)(d) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The court ultimately dismisses the petitions as not maintainable, noting that the rank lists’ validity has expired and that no order for belated selection can be granted, while granting liberty to pursue remedies under the Act.
Provisions of Law Cited
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Principles of natural justice
- De hors de facto/the fact that (De hors)
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners contend that the rank lists for Plant Attender Grade III and Technician (Boiler Grade II) were prepared illegally, arbitrarily, and in breach of natural justice, necessitating quashing of the lists and publication of answer keys, marks, and preliminary rankings. WP(C) No. 20591/2020 asserts that no rank list was published, but seeks disclosure of examination materials and related data. They argue that procedural flaws taint the recruitment process, that due process was not observed, and that there is a need for corrective action to protect candidates’ rights and ensure transparency. Collectively, they request judicial intervention to quash or correct the lists and to compel conformity with applicable rules.
Contentions of Respondents
Respondents contend that the writ petitions are not maintainable against a cooperative society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, citing Association of Milma Officers v. State of Kerala. They maintain there is no pleaded statutory violation or breach of public duties, and the remedy lies under Section 69(2)(d) of the Act. They further argue that the rank lists’ validity has expired and that the petitions are belated; directing selections at this stage would be inappropriate. The court should dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, ensuring deference to statutory remedies and internal governance of cooperative institutions.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Association of Milma Officers v. State of Kerala | 2015 (1) KLT 849 | Distinguished | The court relied on this Full Bench decision to discuss maintainability but distinguished it, concluding that no statutory violation or public-duty breach had been pleaded to attract writ jurisdiction against the cooperative societies, and that the petition fell outside the applicability of that precedent. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against WP(C) Nos. 19203/2020, 20591/2020 and 21370/2020, In the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam (Renjith V.R. vs State of Kerala & others; George Batson vs State of Kerala & others; Sabarish, Pramod Chandran & Bisanth.K vs Ernakulam Regional Co-Operative Milk Producers Union & others) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.