Allowed

Sri.K.P.Vijayakumar v. M/S.Kerala Automobile Ltd.

Kerala HC1 Jan 2014WP(C)/13176/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition seeking payment of salary arrears owed to the petitioner, a former Managing Director. The Court directed the respondent to pay the balance amount of Rs. 3,06,258/- in three monthly instalments with specified due dates and interest liability for default.

What did the court decide?

Directing payment of Rs. 3,06,258/- in three monthly installments by specific dates in 2014, with 7% annual interest for delay.

Sri.K.P.Vijayakumar Vs M/S.Kerala Automobile… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY 2014/11TH POUSHA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 13176 of 2012 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SRI.K.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. LATE M.S. MENON, RESIDING AT PARVATHI NIVAS, DIVANS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 016.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

M/S.KERALA AUTOMOBILE LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ARALUMOODU.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 123.

¶11

BY. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC,KMTWF BOARD SMT.K.K.RAZIYA, SC, KERALA AUTOMOBILES LIMITED

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Msd.

¶14

WP(C).No. 13176 of 2012 (V)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶17

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

¶18

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 15/09/2008 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶19

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/08/2011 FOR FIXATION OF SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES ETC. ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶20

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATE 26/07/2011 TERMINATING THE SERVICE OF THE RESPONDENT.

¶21

EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/07/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶22

EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA TO THE RESPONDENT DIRECTING TO FIX AND PAY SALARIES AND OTHER ALLOWANCES TO THE RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED NIL STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY ISSUED BY RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT-P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED NIL SALARY/FIXATION DETAILS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶25

EXHIBIT-P8: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 15/08/2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶26

EXHIBIT-P9: TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 21/02/2012 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶27

EXHIBIT-P10:TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 28.08.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE GOVT OF KERALA WITH PROPOSAL FOR PERMANENCY OF EMPLOYEES.

¶28

EXHIBIT-P11:TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 26.02.2009 ISSUED BY THE GOVT OF KERALA TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶29

EXHIBIT-P12:TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE GOVT OF KERALA TO THE RESPONDENT.

¶30

EXHIBIT-P13:TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 11.10.2012 ISSUED BY GOVT OF KERALA TO THE RESPONDENT.

...2/-

Msd.

..2..

WP(C).No. 13176 of 2012 (V)

¶35

EXHIBIT-P14:TRUE COPY OF STAMP RECEIPT DATED 16.05.2011 ISSUED BY THE STEEL INDUSTRIES KERALA LTD TO THE PETITIONER.

¶36

EXHIBIT-P15:TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER DATED 16.05.2011 ISSUED BY STEEL INDUSTRIES KERALA LTD TO THE PETITIONER.

¶37

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT-R1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE LIC.

¶39

EXHIBIT-R1(A): A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 10.09.2012 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER.

¶40

EXHIBIT-R1(B): A TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT OF MOVABLE PROPERTY DATED 12.07.2012.

¶41

EXHIBIT-R1(C): A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P.97/2012 OF THE ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 04.10.2012.

¶42

EXHIBIT-R1(D): A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT DATED 22.03.2010.

//TRUE COPY\

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶47

======================== W.P.(C). No. 13176 of 2012

¶48

-------------------------------------------Dated this the 1^st day of January, 2014

¶49

JUDGMENT

¶50

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶51

prayer:

¶52

“ Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the respondent to pay Rs.6,06,258/- together with interest on 12% from 26.7.2011 till the date of payment towards arrears of salaries and other benefits due to the petitioner for the services rendered as Managing Director for the period from 30.9.2008 to 27.7.2011.”

¶53

The respondents have filed a counter affidavit, in response to which the petitioner filed a reply affidavit as well. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on

¶54

27.9.2012, the following interim order was passed.

¶55

“Learned counsel for the respondent submits that a cheque for an amount of 1,00,000/- is being₹ given today to the petitioner. The said submission is recorded.

¶56

Post after one month.”

¶57

Subsequently, another interim order was passed on 12.12.2012

¶58

W.P.C. No.13176 of 2012

¶59

-2-

¶60

in the following terms.

¶61

“Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶62

The petitioner is yet to receive the entire amount of ₹ 6,06,258/- and an amount of 1,00,000/- has been₹ paid which was recorded by this Court in the interim order dated 27/09/2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that payments are being effected to various existing employees ignoring the claims of the petitioner. There will be a direction to pay another amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) within a period of one month.”

¶63

On 4.2.2013, this Court considered the matter further and the following interim order was passed.

¶64

“The order passed by this Court on 12.12.2012 is stated as not complied with so far. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the contents of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent is far from the track of truth as the petitioner is in no way connected with the insinuation levelled against him.

¶65

It is to be seen whether there is any conscious act on the part of the respondent concerned by paying scant regard to the orders passed by this Court and whether any 'suo motu' contempt proceedings had to be registered.

¶66

Post after ten days.”

¶67

Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out

¶68

W.P.C. No.13176 of 2012 -3-

¶69

that, after giving credit to the amount already disbursed to the petitioner effecting disbursement of a sum of 3,00,000/-₹ (Rupees three lakhs), the balance due is 3,06,258/-(Rupees₹ three lakhs six thousand two hundred and fifty eight) and that the said amount might be directed to be disbursed within the shortest possible time.

¶70

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that, the respondent might be permitted to disburse the amount by way of 'three' monthly instalments.

¶71

After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent to disburse the balance amount as mentioned above, by way of 'three monthly' instalments. The first instalment of ₹ 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) shall be disbursed to the petitioner on or before the last working day of this month. Another 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) shall be₹ disbursed to the petitioner on or before the last working day of February, 2014 and the last instalment of 1,06,258/-(Rupees₹ one lakh six thousand two hundred and fifty eight) shall be disbursed to the petitioner on or before the last working day of

¶72

W.P.C. No.13176 of 2012 -4-

¶73

March, 2014. If the balance amount is not disbursed to the petitioner on time as specified above, it will be for the respondent to satisfy the same with interest at the rate of 7% per annum on

¶74

the whole amount.

¶75

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶76

kp/-

Sri.K.P.Vijayakumar v. M/S.Kerala Automobile Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.K.P.Vijayakumar v. M/S.Kerala Automobile Ltd.

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.B. Hameed Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Kuriakose Vs the Rdo

Shibukumar Vs the Chief Secretary

Sivarajan.K Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Renuka Suresh Vs District Collector

Vipindas Vs Central Board of Secondary Education