Allowed

K.C.Lenin v. the Chairman & Managing Director, Ksrtc

Kerala HC1 Dec 2014WP(C)/28968/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by retired peon seeking pensionary benefits withheld by respondent Corporation due to loan default with cooperative society court allowed petition directing Corporation to pay terminal benefits after deducting loan amount.

What did the court decide?

Notice to settle and pay terminal benefits within six weeks after deducting loan amount due to 4th respondent.

K.C.Lenin Vs the Chairman & Managing… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 28968 of 2014 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

K.C.LENIN, AGED 58 YEARS, (PPO NO. 45933), S/O. CHINNAPPAN, KUNNEZHATH HOUSE, KADEBHAGAM, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-682 006, \ (PEON RETIRED ON 30-04-2012 FROM ERNAKULAM DEPOT).

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶11

2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶12

3. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, ERNAKULAM DEPOT- 682 011.

¶13

4. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT WORKERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCEITY LTD.NO. T.133,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶14

R1 TO R3 BY ADV.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, S.C R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN, S.C

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

WP(C).No. 28968 of 2014 (U)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PASS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

¶21

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 21-12-2011 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KERALA SOCIAL SECURITY MISSION, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶22

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10-09-2014.

¶23

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23-10-2014.

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶30

¶31

W.P. (C) No. 28968 of 2014

¶32

¶33

Dated this the 1^st day of December, 2014

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

¶36

Briefly stated, the petitioner retired as Peon from the respondent Corporation on 30.04.2012 while working in Ernakulam Depot. Despite his retirement, so far the respondent Corporation has not paid the petitioner's pensionary benefits such as DCRG and commuted value of pension. In that regard, the petitioner is said to have filed Ext.P3 representation before the respondent Corporation.

¶37

It emerges from a perusal of the record that the petitioner is said to have borrowed certain amounts from the 4^th respondent Co-Operative Society and committed default

¶38

W.P.(C) No. 28968/2014 -2-

¶39

thereafter owing to what is said to be his illness. When the respondent authorities citing the reason of loan default refused to release the terminal benefits, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. During the course of submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has expressly stated that whatever be the loan amount, the 2^nd respondent may pay the said amount to the 4^th respondent and thereafter disburse the remaining amount to the petitioner. He has further submitted that the petitioner has also filed Ext.P4 representation before the 4^th respondent for scaling down the interest.

¶40

In the facts and circumstances, I do not see any tenable objection on the part of the respondent Corporation in not settling the terminal benefits of the petitioner, given his express undertaking before this Court that the respondent may adjust his entire loan amounts due to the 4^th respondent and pay thereafter only the balance amount.

¶41

Accordingly, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the 1^st respondent to settle and pay the terminal

¶42

W.P.(C) No. 28968/2014 -3-

¶43

benefits of the petitioner after adjusting the loan amount due to the 4^th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is further made clear that the 4^th respondent may consider Ext.P4 representation of the petitioner concerning scaling down the interest in accordance with law before closing the loan by adjusting the terminal benefits of the petitioner.

¶44

sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.

¶45

¶46

W.P.(C) No. 28968/2014 -4-

K.C.Lenin v. the Chairman & Managing Director, Ksrtc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.C.Lenin v. the Chairman & Managing Director, Ksrtc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.a.D.Antony Vs the Comptroller

Vannatham Veettil Hareef Vs State of Kerala

Asha Devi Vs the Cochin Devaswom Board

C.K. Sajan Vs the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The Manager, Kambil Mopila Higher Secondary School Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil Pratheek P.J. Vs Union of India