Dismissed

Ramadas P D v. Biju Prabhakar

Kerala HC1 Jun 2022Con.Case(C)/285/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt matter arising from a writ petition for arrears of pension, the respondent corporation recalled an order restricting pension from 5.3.2022. The High Court of Kerala, by this judgment, noted the withdrawal of the impediment. The Court directed that pension be paid within a week with effect from 1.6.2017 and dismissed the contempt petition as nothing remained to constrain the responden

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to receive pension within one week from the date of judgment with effect from 1.6.2017 at the District Transport Officer, Thrissur. Liberty granted to revive the contempt petition

Ramadas P D Vs Biju Prabhakar — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

CON.CASE(C) NO. 285 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 26360/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶7

KERALA

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

RAMADAS P D AGED 60 YEARS S/O. DASAN, (DRIVER, KSRTC, THRISSUR (KODUNGALLOOR) DEPOT) RETIRED ON 31-07-2017) RESIDING AT PARUVAKKAL HOUSE, MADAPLATHURUTH, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN 683516

¶10

BY ADV K.P.RAJEEVAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

BIJU PRABHAKAR MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 023

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

ADV DEEPU THANKAN SC FOR KSRTC

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CON.CASE(C) NO. 285 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This Court on 31.5.2022 had noticing all the facts passed the

¶20

following order:

¶21

“ This Court on 28.3.2022 passed the following order: This Court vide order dated 24.11.2021 disposed of the writ petition of the petitioner by issuing direction to the respondents to decide the representation Ext.P3 claiming arrears of pension, DCRG, commuted leave of pension, staff welfare fund and other eligible benefits within 45 days. For non-compliance of the same, present contempt petition has been filed.

¶22

Respondent has put in appearance and placed on record an order dated 22.03.2022, whereby it is alleged to have passed an order on the claim of the petitioner by holding that at the time of personal hearing it came to the notice that petitioner had availed the leave for other employment to abroad without prior sanction of the Corporation, and on humanitarian ground, the period of unauthorised absence from 07.11.2015 till the retirement has been treated as Leave Without Allowance (NQS) vide order dated 04.03.2022 and the disciplinary case has been closed. Pension and other benefits, if eligible will be sanctioned within a period of two months. Order is taken on record.

¶23

To see whether the respondent actually disburses the pensionary benefits within a period of two months, I keep the contempt petition alive and adjourn for 31.05.2022.

¶24

2. Subsequent to the order dated 22.3.2022 of the Chairman cum Managing Director, Pension disbursement officer had released the pension with effect from 5.3.2022 whereas it should have been from the date of retirement ie., from 2017.

¶25

3. Mr. Deepu Thankan submits that the Pension officer has no jurisdiction to put such conditions in view of the order of the Chairman cum Managing Director and expresses remorse and prays for one day time to come out with a positive order in releasing the pension from the date of the retirement.

¶26

Post on 1.6.2022. In case the order of Pension officer

¶27

CON.CASE(C) NO. 285 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

restricting the payment of pension from 5.3.2022 is not withdrawn by tomorrow, he is directed to be present in court.”

¶30

Today, learned counsel for the respondent has placed on record the order dated 31.5.2022 whereby the order of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 22.3.2022 which was made effective with effect from 5.3.2022 by the pension disbursement officer has been recalled. It has been specified that the pension with effect from 1.6.2017 will be payable at the office of the District Transport Officer, Thrissur. The same is taken on record and marked as Ext.C(1). Nothing survives in the contempt petition and is accordingly closed. It is made clear that the pension would be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of one week from today with effect from 1.6.2017. Liberty is granted to revive the contempt petition in the absence of release of the pension within the specified period.

Sd/-

sab

AMIT RAWAL

JUDGE

CON.CASE(C) NO. 285 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 285/2022

¶38

PETITIONER ANNEXURES:

¶39

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO. 26360/2021 DATED 24-11-2021

¶40

Annexure C1 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION DATED 31.5.2022

Ramadas P D v. Biju Prabhakar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramadas P D v. Biju Prabhakar

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

Raji K., Vs State of Kerala

Atc Telecom Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Vs Assistant Engineer

Rajappan Nair K.S Vs Smt. Dr. P.K. Jayasree

K.T.Manoj Kumar Vs the Excise Commissioner

Karthiyani Vs State of Kerala

Saraswathi B. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board