The petitioner in the above writ petition is aggrieved with the non-consideration of the petitioner for appointment to the vacancies notified in the District Co-operative Bank; under the post reserved for the employees of Member Societies. 2. Admittedly there was a notification made by the Kerala Public Service Commission [for brevity “PSC”], against which the petitioner made an application on the basis of Exhibit P4 certificate of employment. The petitioner, admittedly, is continuing on ad hoc basis in a consolidated salary under the 4th respondent-Society.
3. The PSC has filed an affidavit, placing on record the eligibility conditions prescribed in the notification published in the Gazette dated 24.04.2006. The qualification prescribed for employees of the Member/Primary Co-operative Societies WP(C).No.10766 of 2010 - 2 -
are as follows:
“i. B.A/B.Sc/B.Com w HDC or JDC OR B.Com with Co-operation OR B.Sc (Co-operation and Banking) of the Kerala Agricultural University.
ii. Must be a regular employee who has completed not less than three years regular service in any cadre and continuing in service in a Member society/Primary Co-operative society affiliated to the respective District Co-operative Bank. (The employee should be in the service of the society not only on the date of application but also on the date of appointment)”.
4. Hence, evidently only regular employees who have completed three years regular service and continuing as such in a Member Society would be eligible for applying under the notification. The petitioner admittedly is not in the regular service of the 4th respondent-Society. Further, Exhibit P4 does not advance the case of the petitioner, since the notification specifically specified that the service certificate should be issued by the Assistant Registrar (General) showing the service details of the applicant. The petitioner was admitted provisionally for the Objective Type Test only; and was included in the probability list. On verification of the original documents, for which the petitioner was called on 23.03.2010, it WP(C).No.10766 of 2010 - 3 -
was found that no service certificate as required in the notification was produced. The petitioner was, hence, granted a further time of five days to produce the same. The petitioner, however, did not produce any certificate as prescribed in the notification.
5. Even now the petitioner does not have a case that service certificate as indicated in the notification is produced by the petitioner before the PSC or before this Court. The petitioner having not produced a service certificate as indicated in the notification, the petitioner would not be entitled to be continued in the list. The petitioner also, admittedly, is a person appointed on an ad hoc basis and continuing in a consolidated salary, in the Member Society, which would not be a “regular employment” as contemplated in the notification.
For all the above reasons, the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge.
vku/-
( true copy )