Remanded

Vijayan Pillai S. v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

Kerala HC8 Jul 2022Con.Case(C)/181/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In High Court of Kerala, a single bench reviewed two petitions, one contempt alleging non-compliance and a review challenging an interim order. The court corrected a missed fact regarding a break-up of recovered amounts and directed the corporation to issue a notice for reconciliation before refunding the petitioner. Both petitions disposed.45 days.

What did the court decide?

Directed KSRTC to issue a notice with a break-up of recovered amounts to the petitioner, allow reconciliation with the Society, and refund only the excess amount recovered from his salary after reconc

Vijayan Pillai S. Vs Biju Prabhakar IAS — Kerala HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL FRIDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1944 CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022

¶2

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 5454/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶3

PETITIONER/S:

¶4

VIJAYAN PILLAI S. SPECIAL GRADE DRIVER (RTD.), KSRTC RESIDING AT KARYADIYIL HOUSE, PERINGALA P.O., KAYAMKULAM - 690 537.

¶5

BY ADVS. R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SABINA JAYAN

¶6

RESPONDENT/S:

¶7

BIJU PRABHAKAR IAS

¶8

AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, TRIVANDRUM, KERALA, INDIA, PIN - 695 023.

¶9

OTHER PRESENT:

¶10

SRI DEEPU THANKAN SC KSRTC

¶11

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2022, ALONG WITH RP.209/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022

¶13

¶14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶15

PRESENT

¶16

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶17

FRIDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶18

RP NO. 209 OF 2022

¶19

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 5454/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶20

REVIEW PETITIONER/S:

¶21

1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023

¶22

2 THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER KSRTC, KAYAMKULAM, PIN - 690502

¶23

3 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023

¶24

BY ADV SHRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC, KSRTC

¶25

RESPONDENT/S:

¶26

1 VIJAYAN PILLAI S. AGED 56 YEARS RETIRED SPECIAL GRADE DRIVER, RTD, KSRTC RESIDING AT KARYADIYIL HOUSE, PERINGALA.PO, KAYAMKULAM, PIN - 690537

¶27

2 THE KSRTC KAYAMKULAM DISTRICT EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.K.271, KAYAMKULAM P.O., REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 690502

¶28

3 J. SHEELA W/O. LATE K. RAJENDRA BABU, STORE KEEPER, KSRTC CHERTHALA DEPOT, CHERTHALA, PIN - 688524 BY ADV R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI

¶29

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2022, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).181/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022 3

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

This order of mine shall dispose of two petitions; the contempt petition bearing No.181 of 2022, alleging non-compliance of the directions contained in the judgment dated 28.10.2021 rendered in W.P.(C) No.5454 of 2020 and a review petition, bearing No.209 of 2022 seeking review of the judgment dated 28.10.2021.

¶33

Petitioner in the main writ petition had challenged the action of the KSRTC in recovering the amount from the salary of having stood a surety to a loan extended by Society to one Rajendra Babu who unfortunately died and his widow was given compassionate employment. The pith and substance of the submissions, the judgment of this Court was to the extent that the amount sought to be recovered from the petitioner as a surety which being a co-extensive, could not have been recovered in the manner and mode without giving any break-up and thus ordered the KSRTC to make the payment of Rs.2,88,240/- and to reconcile the account from the Society.

¶34

In the review petition it has been alleged that in the additional statement of 28.9.2021, the Corporation had paid a sum of Rs.1,24,740/- to the Co-operative Society, Kayamkulam vide cheque

¶35

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022 4

¶36

dated 8.2.2021 which was the liability of loan of Rajendra Babu and Rs1,63,500/- towards the Co-operative Society, Trivandrum vide cheque of 8.2.2021. It is contended that there is an error apparent on

¶37

the record of the judgment to the extent that the petitioner is not entitled to seek the refund of the amount of Rs.2,88,240/- as it also contained the element of the loan recovered from him and paid to the Society.

¶38

On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the non-applicant/petitioner refuted the aforementioned contentions and heavily relied upon the observations recorded by this Court with regard to the inaction of the KSRTC in effecting the recovery in the manner and mode.

¶39

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. In paragraph 4 of the additional statement dated 28.9.2021, the Corporation had stated as under:

¶40

The Corporation has transferred an amount of Rs.1,24,740/- towards the Co-operative Society, Kayamkulam vide cheque bearing No.662398 dated 8.2.2021 and an amount of Rs.1,63,500/- the Cooperative Society, Trivandrum vide Cheque bearing No.662397 dated 8.2.2021 and thus an amount of Rs.2,88,240/- has been paid to the societies. It is also informed to me that the said cheques were honoured by the respectivesocieties.

¶41

This fact, according to me, had escaped the notice of this

¶42

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022 5

¶43

Court as it contained both the element of Rs.1,24,740/- and Rs.1,63,500/-, the total of which comes to Rs.2,88,240/-. Thus I am of the view that the penultimate paragraph of the judgment of this Court requires to be reviewed to the extent that the Corporation before returning the amount as ordered by this Court will issue a notice to the petitioner giving the break-up of the amount to be recovered from him and paid to the Society as well as that of the amount due from Rajendra Babu and paid to the Society. On receipt of the break-up, the respondent would be given a chance to appear before the Society for reconciliation and thereafter whatever the amount/figure is arrived at, which was actually recovered from the salary of the petitioner towards the dues of Rajendra Babu, the same is ordered to be refunded to the petitioner, non-applicant in the review petition. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶44

Both the petitions are disposed of. Liberty is granted to the parties to apprise this court by moving any application.

SD/-

sab

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022

¶49

¶50

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 181/2022

¶51

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶52

Annexure I	TRUE COPY OF THE IN WP(C) NO.5454 COURT.	JUDGMENT DATED 29/10/2021 OF 2020 OF THIS HON'BLE
Annexure II	TRUE COPY OF THE 30/11/2021 FROM RESPONDENT ALONG	REPRESENTATION DATED THE PETITIONER TO THE WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Annexure III	TRUE COPY OF THE -I AND II.	ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ANNEXURE

¶53

CON.CASE(C) NO. 181 OF 2022 and RP No.209 of 2022 7

¶54

APPENDIX OF R.P No.209/2022

¶55

ANNEXURE 1 – TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT FROM THE ASST. TRANSPORT OFFICER KAYAMKULAM ON 2.4.2022

¶56

ANNEXURE 2 – TRUE COPY OF THE RECOVERY STATEMENT ISSUED TO 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE ASST. TRANSPORT OFFICER, KAYAMKULAM ON 10.5.2022

Vijayan Pillai S. v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayan Pillai S. v. Biju Prabhakar IAS

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

T.T.Raman Vs Forest Industries (Travancore) Ltd.

K. Vidyadharan Vs Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

Kerala Khadi Village Industries Board Vs Nisha K.K

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Vs Vijayan Pillai S.

Transport Democratic Federation (Tdf) Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Biverah Hotel and Suits , Vs the Additional District Magistrate