The Court held that despite the respondent having an alternative remedy via execution proceedings, it exercised discretionary jurisdiction to direct the implementation of the Railway Claims Tribunal Award within one month.
Directed the respondent to implement the Tap P1 award within one month of receipt of the judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2012/11TH MAGHA,1933
WPC.No. 1105 of 2012 (K)
PETITIONER: ===========
P.T.THOMAS, AGED 75 YEARS S/O LATE THOMAS, RESIDING AT TOM VILAS ALIAS CHARUVIL KIDANGANNORE KOZHENCHERY TALUK
BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)
RESPONDENT: ===========
UNION OF INDIA, OWNING THE SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER
BY SRI.C.S.DIAS,SC, RAILWAYS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JV
WPC NO: 1105/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 : COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 30.04.09 OF RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM
P2 : COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICER DATED 19.11.2011 ISSUED TO RESPONDENT.
P2(A) : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
JV
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 1105 of 2012
==================
Dated this the 31st day of January, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner and four others obtained Ext.P1 order from the Railway Claims Tribunal for payment of ` 4 lakhs with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 27.6.2007 till payment. The petitioner's grievance is that although Ext.P1 order has been passed as early as on 30.4.2009, the same has not been implemented by the respondent yet. The petitioners, therefore, seek the following relief:
“issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the respondent to pay the amount due to them under Ext.P1 forthwith.”
resorting to execution proceedings does not deter me from exercising my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Insofar as admittedly no appeal is pending against Ext.P1 order as on today, the
w.p.c.1105/12 - : 2 :-
respondent is bound to implement Ext.P1 order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to implement Ext.P1 in its letter and spirit, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
sdk+
Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court can exercise discretion to issue a writ mandating implementation of the Tribunal Award despite the availability of execution proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.T.THOMAS
UNION OF INDIA, OWNING THE SOUTHERN RAILWAY
S.SIRI JAGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
