Disposed

Nabeeza.N.P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Sept 2012WP(C)/17332/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought an exemption from producing a guardianship certificate for releasing a minor's general provident fund. The court directed the Government to take a decision after calling for a report from the second respondent and directed relief within two months, explicitly stating it did not consider merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Government to take a decision and communicate it within two months after calling for a report from the second respondent.

Nabeeza.N.P. Vs State of Kerala — Child Custody and Guardianship | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/19TH BHADRA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 17332 of 2012 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. NABEEZA.N.P., AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.LATE P.A.LABDUL SALAM, FLAT NO.H24, VETERINARY COLLEGE CAMPUS, MANNOOTHY P.O., THRISSUR-680 651.

¶8

2. ANCIYA.P.A, AGED 13 YEARS,(MINOR), D/O.LATE P.A.ABDUL SALAM, FLAT NO.H 24, VETERINARY COLLEGE CAMPUS, MANNOOTHY.P.O THRISSUR-680 651. REPRESENTED BY MOTHER GUARDIAN THE FIRST PETITIONER.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATIFF

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SOCIAL AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695 001.

¶12

2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, (A & E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695 001.

¶13

3. THE DIRECTORATE EMPLOYMENT, DIRECTORATE OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695 014.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.T.SHEEBA

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

MJL

¶17

WP(C).No. 17332 of 2012 (N)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE EXT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K5/10407/2011/DE DATED 29-11-2011 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.30/C1.14657/I/2011-12 DATED 31-03-2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.30/C1.14657/I/2011-12/1118 DATED 22-08-2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE FIRST PETITIONER. EXT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.C3-12566/12 DATED 03-06-2012 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P A TO JUDGE

MJL

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(C)No.17332 Of 2012

¶28

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

¶29

DATED THIS THE 10^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioners are respectively the mother and her minor daughter. It is averred that the natural guardian of the 2^nd petitioner is the 1^st petitioner-mother under the Muhammeden law. The father passed away on 6.10.2010, while he was working as Employment Officer, as evident from the death certificate Exhibit P1.

¶32

The challenge is against the direction to produce guardianship certificate for releasing and disbursement of the general provident fund amount of Rs.59,329/- to the 2^nd petitioner. Now the amount due to the child is remaining unpaid, as the respondents insist that the same can be authorised only on attaining the age of 18 or on production of guardianship certificate from the Court of law. Exhibit P2 is the copy of the proceedings issued by the 3^rd respondent, which was passed on the basis of the order passed by the 2^nd respondent produced as Exhibit P3.

¶33

W.P.(C)No.17332/12

¶34

-2-

¶35

The learned Government Pleader sought time to file a counter affidavit.

¶36

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation before the Government seeking for exemption from producing guardianship certificate and a copy of the same was produced before this Court for perusal, which is dated 21.8.2012. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under Note 2 of Rule 31 of the General Provident Fund(Kerala) Rules and other provisions therein, power is conferred to grant exemption.

¶37

Therefore the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Government to take a decision in the matter and appropriate decision will be taken and communicated to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition,after calling for a report from the 2^nd respondent. It is made clear that this Court has not considered anything on the merits.

¶38

Sd/-( T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR , JUDGE)

¶39

dsn

Nabeeza.N.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nabeeza.N.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayaprakas T.K. Vs Sri.M.Sivasankar

Sheeba K.P Vs M.S.Viswambharan

E.P.Joshi Vs Kerala State Housing Board & 3 Others

P.G.Raghavan Pillai Vs P.J.Thomas

Saramma Joseph & Others Vs State of Kerala

M.Vijayakumaran Vs the Green Channel Clearance Committee