@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
K. Chandru, J.@mdashThe petitioner in this writ petition is a registered Trade Union with registration No. 383/SAT. It is the statement of the
petitioner Union that their members are working as Salesman and Attenders in various Cooperative Societies in Tamil Nadu for the past several
years without any promotion. The Union has been making request to promote the Salesman and Attenders for the post of Attender, Fertiliser
Salesman and Clerk (Assistant) in their respective Cooperative Societies. When the Trade Union found that the second respondent viz.,
Cooperative Societies State Recruitment Bureau had issued notification dated 02.11.2012 calling for applications from candidates to write a
written examination followed by interview for the post of Assistants in various categories in cooperative societies, the writ petition came to be filed,
seeking for a direction to implement the circular dated 03.08.2012 issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies for giving promotions to the
Salesman/Attenders to the posts of Assistants in Co-operative Societies.
2. When the writ petition came up on 27.12.2012, this Court ordered notice regarding admission returnable in four weeks and also granted interim
injunction, restraining the respondents from filling up the posts of Assistants in Cooperative Societies through direct recruitment without giving
promotions to the qualified Salesman/Attenders for the post of Assistants, pending disposal of the writ petition.
3. Aggrieved by the grant of interim order, the respondent State has filed an application to vacate the interim injunction in M.P. No. 1 of 2013
supported by a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents.
4. Heard the arguments of Mr.C. Prakasam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Navaneetha Krishnan, learned Advocate General
assisted by Mr. L.P. Shanmuga Sundaram, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent State.
5. The basis on which the writ petition filed by the petitioner Association largely depends upon the circular issued by the Registrar of Cooperative
Societies. The said circular dated 03.08.2012 referred to the previous circulars issued by its office dated 08.12.1997 and 02.02.2009. The stand
of the department was even though Cooperative Societies were running Public Distribution System and engaging persons like Attenders and
Salesman in the said system since they did not come within the norms prescribed in the Cooperative Society for employing staff and considering
that if such persons who are employed in the public distribution system undertaken by the cooperative societies are regularly appointed and having
educational qualification, they also should be considered for promotion in the Societies. Therefore, the original exemption excluding them from
being considered was removed by circular dated 03.08.2012. It is now stated that societies are entitled to promote such qualified persons who are
working in the Public Distribution system and who are regularly appointed for filling up promotion post and vacancies created on such promotion
should be immediately filled up and till such time vacancies are filled up, persons who are promoted shall continue to work in the post of Salesman.
6. Therefore, on the strength of the circular, it is now contended that every Co-operative society is having its own special bye-laws containing the
method of employees recruitment and their educational qualifications for each post and those bye-laws were approved by the Registrar of
Cooperative Societies. Bye-laws provides for educational qualification for the post of Assistant, which is a degree with Diploma in Cooperation
together with knowledge of computer. But notwithstanding the same, the second respondent has called for applications from the candidates and
allowed degree holders to write written examination which was fixed on 09.12.2012. Since the respondents have ignored the bye-laws as well as
Rule 149 of Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Rules and without amending Rule 149 fixing the educational qualification was illegal. The Registrar
has issued a circular to promote Salesman/ Attenders for the post of Fertilizer Salesman, Clerk (Assistant) who are having qualifications and were
working several years in the Society. Without considering the request of such qualified persons calling for applications from open market
prescribing different educational qualification was not valid.
7. Countering these allegations, in the counter affidavit filed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, it is stated that Section 74 of the Tamil Nadu
Cooperative Societies Act provides for constitution of Recruitment Bureau at the State level for recruitment to such categories of paid officers and
servants of the Cooperative societies. In exercise of the powers conferred u/s 74, a State Recruitment Bureau for the paid officers and servants for
employment in all categories of Registered Cooperative Societies under the control of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies have been made by
the State Government by issuance of G.O. Ms. No. 135, Cooperation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 25.10.2012.
8. By the said Government Order, the State Government issued the following notification in the Government Gazette which is as follows:-
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 (Tamil Nadu Act 30 of 1983), the
Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby constitutes a State Recruitment Bureau for the recruitment of paid officers and servants for employment in all
categories of registered Co-operative Societies under the control of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, other than the staff and students co-
operative stores, in respect of all the posts from the category of Junior Assistants and above, other than the post for which common cadre of
service has been constituted u/s 75 of the said Act, which shall consists of the following members, namely:-
(i) the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Chennai, who shall be its Chairman;
(ii) the Managing Director or the Special Officer, as the case may be, of the Tamil Nadu State Apex Co-operative Bank, Chennai, who shall be its
Member Secretary;
(iii) The Managing Director or the Special Officer, as the case may be, of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Union Limited Member;
(iv) the Managing Director or the Special Officer, as the case may be, of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited Member;
and
(v) an officer of the Co-operative Department not below the rank of Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, who belongs to Scheduled Castes
or Scheduled Tribes, nominated by the Registrar from time to time Member.
9. It is now stated that the procedure for the constitution of State Recruitment Bureau for recruitment of paid officers and servants and
amendments to Rules 150 and 151 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Rules, 1988 were also issued by the State Government by G.O. Ms.
No. 25, Cooperation Food and Consumer Protection Department, dated 17.02.2011. The said Rules which are issued by virtue of power
conferred u/s 180 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 was published in the Government Gazette. The said rules provides
procedure to be adopted by the Recruitment Bureau in the matter of recruitment.
10. The second respondent by virtue of power conferred on him had issued the notification calling for applications from candidates for filling up the
posts of Assistants in the Tamil Nadu State Cooperative Bank, Tamil Nadu Cooperative Union, Tamil Nadu State Cooperative Federation, Tamil
Nadu Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank, Tamil Nadu Consumer Cooperative Federation, District Cooperative Banks,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu Consumer Cooperative Marketing stores, Cooperative Presses, District Cooperative Union, Thanjavur Cooperative Sales
Union, Town Cooperative Banks, Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank, Cooperative Threft Society, Cooperative Bank and Rural Development
Bank, Cooperative Sales Society and Primary Cooperative stores and other cooperative societies. The number of posts advertised was 3589 in
respect of various vacancies identified in these societies and persons who are qualified were directed to send applications. The educational
qualification prescribed was a degree in a 10+2+3 pattern and it is followed by a qualification that persons who are recruited should complete Co-
operative Diploma within a period of two years and such diploma can be obtained by studying in a distance mode.
11. The said notification dated 03.11.2012 came to be challenged by several individuals on different grounds in W.P. Nos. 30654 to 30656 of
2012 and they were dismissed by an order dated 19.11.2012. In that batch of writ petitions, the challenge was to the upper age limit prescribed
by the notification and that was repelled by this Court. Subsequently, one individual by name M. Ravi filed W.P. No. 31195 of 2012 on the
ground that he is having degree in cooperation and like him there are about 2000 persons who are having similar degree and relegating the
acquisition of cooperative training and giving two years to complete Cooperative Diploma for the selected candidates was not valid since trained
cooperative graduates are already available. That writ petition was rejected by this Court on 23.11.2012. Similar writ petition in W.P. No. 31230
of 2012 was also filed challenging the prescription of upper age limit by the impugned notification and the same was also rejected on 22.11.2012.
12. But in the present case, the petitioner Trade Union is aggrieved by calling for applications in respect of 849 vacancies in the Primary
Agricultural Cooperative Banks on the contentions which are noted above. Repelling the said contention, it is contended by the respondent that the
circular issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies dated 03.08.2012 to promote the employees in the Public Distribution system though they
have not been included in the cadre strength of the respective Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society. It is now stated that Public
Distribution System salesmen are eligible to get promotion only to the posts mentioned viz., the post of Fertilizer Salesman and Attender/Junior
Clerk, whereas the notification issued calls for application for the post of Assistant.
13. It is in the above back ground, it has to be seen whether the petitioner union has made out any case to seek for a direction to implement the
circular dated 03.08.2012. As rightly held by the respondent State that the circular relied on does not relate to the post of Assistant though the
petitioner Union tried to make it appear that the post of Clerk and Assistant are the same whereas the respondent has taken a stand that the
Salesmen working in the Public Distribution System are eligible only for the post of Junior Clerk or Attender or Fertilizer Salesman. In any event in
the affidavit filed by the petitioner Trade Union, they have not even given the nature of bye-laws of the various societies under which their members
are said to be working and the nature of service condition that has been set out in respect of those societies.
14. In the present case, the power to issue the notification by the respondent flows from Section 74 followed by statutory notification issued in
G.O.Ms. No. 135 dated 25.10.2012. Since the power of recruitment vest with the State Recruitment Bureau and the second respondent
notification is not under challenge, the petitioner''s present contention seeking for a direction to enforce the circular of the Registrar dated
03.08.2012 cannot be countenanced by this Court.
15. When asked as to the legal validity of the circular dated 03.08.2012, Mr. C. Prakasam, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Section
181 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, which gives power to the Registrar to give directions. A reading of Section 181 does now
show that the Registrar has got such omnibus power to give direction to any society in respect of filling up the post of such society. In any event, as
rightly explained by the respondent, the salesmen of the Public Distribution System are entitled to be promoted only to certain category of posts
and the present notification does not cover any such post. Hence, the present writ petition is misconceived. Accordingly, the writ petition stands
dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
