1. Petitioner is aggrieved with the interdiction made by the Joint Registrar by the impugned order, Ext.P3, to an appointment to the post of Secretary. The interdiction made by the second respondent was on a complaint by the third respondent. The third respondent is a person, who was dismissed from the service of the petitioner bank. The third respondent's contention is that an appeal is pending on the dismissal order and if she is re-instated, she would be entitled to be promoted to the post of Secretary. On such a contention, the Secretary's post cannot be kept vacant till her disputes are adjudicated by the appellate and revisional authorities. If the third respondent is re-instated in service, then, definitely, the third respondent should take proceedings in accordance with law to get her claims established. In fact, a subsequent interdiction made to the selection attempted by the petitioner society to the post of Junior W.P.(C)No.25478 of 2011 -:2:-
Clerk was also interdicted by the Joint Registrar, which has been set aside by this Court by judgment dt.9.10.2014 in W.P.(C)No.13027 of 2012.
2. Considering all the above aspects, the writ petition has to be allowed setting aside Ext.P3. It is also to be noticed that at the time of admission, there was an interim order directing the selection to be carried out, but, however, subject to the result of the writ petition. The appointments, if any made, hence, has to be regularised.
Writ petition is allowed. No costs.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
sl.