Disposed

Sivaraman v. Cochin Corporation

Kerala HC4 Jul 2007WP(C)/3396/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached the Court regarding delay in DCRG disbursement. Court directed petitioner to clear liability with second respondent; first respondent to take action within three months based on clearance certificate. Writ disposed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to clear liability with second respondent; first respondent to act within three months upon clearance certificate.

Sivaraman Vs Cochin Corporation — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2007 / 13TH ASHADHA 1929

¶5

WP(C).No. 3396 of 2004(D)

¶6

-------------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

-----------------

¶9

SIVARAMAN, KULANGARATHARA HOUSE, HARIJAN COLONY, CHILAVANNUR, COCHIN - 20.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.PULIKKOOL ABUBACKER

¶11

SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

----------------------

¶14

1. COCHIN CORPORATION, REP. BY SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION.

¶15

2. MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

3. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., ERNAKULAM.

¶17

4. K.F.ELIZABETH, CLERK, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, KOCHI.

¶18

5. P.T.KUNJAPPAN, SWEEPER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, KOCHI.

¶19

BY ADV. SRI.RAJU JOSEPH, ADDL.SC.,KSFE LTD. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, K.S.F.E., LTD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJKUMAR ADV. SRI. K.ANAND, SC FOR R1

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO: 3396/2003 D

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶24

EXT.P1. COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 1/1/04 BY THE R1 TO THE PETITIONER .

¶25

EXT.P2. COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF MONEY DT. 26/11/2003 BY THE R3 TO SMT. LEELA VISWANATHAN.

True copy

tga

KURIAN JOSEPH J.

W.P.(C) No.3396 of 2004

¶30

---------------------------------------------Dated 4^th July, 2007.

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by the delay in disbursement of the DCRG. It is seen from Ext.P1 that there was liability. It is further seen from the statement filed on behalf of the second respondent that the petitioner has not fully cleared the liability. In view of the statement of the second respondent, in case the petitioner has still any grievance left, he may approach the second respondent, in which case, the matter will be duly considered by the second respondent and depending on the clearance certificate issued by the second respondent, appropriate action will be taken by the first respondent in the matter, within another three months.

¶33

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶34

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶35

tgs

¶36

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

¶37

O.P. NO. OF 200

¶38

J U D G M E N T Dated 4^th July, 2007.

Sivaraman v. Cochin Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivaraman v. Cochin Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.K.Purushothaman Vs the Welfare Fund Inspector,Palakkad

V.K.Raghavan Vs the Deputy Tahsildar

K.v.Quseph Vs Dir of Technical Education

Pana Ninna Residents Association Vs State of Kerala

E.M.Madhu Vs District Collector

Asok Kumar.N. Vs Director of Technical Education