High Court dismissed a writ petition by a cooperative bank challenging Lok Ayukta's refusal to attach employees' salaries for a loan recovery, noting the entire amount had been recovered by the time of hearing.
Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs given the recovery of the entire amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 11987 OF 2017
PETITIONERS:
1 THE KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, HEAD OFFICE, P.B. NO.130, CHINNAKADA,KOLLAM. PIN. 691001.2 THE BRANCH MANAGER SUPERINTENDENT (SPECIAL RECOVERY CELL), KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO. 130, CHINNAKADA, KOLLAM, PIN. 691001.BY ADV SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SC, KOLLAM DIST.
CO-OPERATIVE BANK
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, VIKAS BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695033.2 P.S.SURESH BABU. WATCHER, PUTHIYIDAM DEVASWOM SUB GROUP, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, PUNALUR PO,KOLLAM, RESIDING AT SURESH MANDIRAM, GRACING BLOCK WARD, PLACHERY PO, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 691131.3 B. BHUVANACHANDRAN PILLAI VELLANGIL VEEDU, CHERUMOODU, VELLIMON PO,KOLLAM. 691511.W.P(C).11987/2017
2
4K.G. JAYADEVAN PILLAI
HEAD CLERK (RTD),
ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, PUNALUR GROUP,
RESIDING AT ALAPPURATHU PUTHEN VEEDU,
THOTTUVA, PALLICKAL PO, ADOOR-691523.
BY ADVS.
SMT. D.P. RENU- R1
SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI-R2
SRI.C.R.JAYAKUMAR-R4
SRI.NOBEL RAJU
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).11987/2017
3
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 5th day of July, 2022
S. Manikumar, CJ.
Being aggrieved by the orders made by Exhibit P6 dated 13.6.2016 and Exhibit P9 dated 3.10.2016 on the files of Upa Lok Ayukta, instant writ petition is filed.
The 1st petitioner is a District Co-operative Bank. The principle object of the District Co-operative Banks is to raise funds to be lent to its members, including nominal or associated members. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent, during the year 2000 availed a loan of Rs.50,000/- as consumption loan No.152 from Anchal branch. The 2nd and 4th respondents are the sureties to the loan transaction. The 2nd respondent is an employee of Travancore Devaswom Board. The 4th respondent was also an employee of the Devaswom Board and retired from the service. The 3rd respondent was employed in Travancore Devaswom Board and was terminated by the Board for manipulation of
W.P(C).11987/2017
4
account during 2007. Since there were arrears due to the bank, the Branch Manager issued Ext-P1 notice dated 14.9.2015 to the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner to recover an amount of Rs.5000/-per month from the salary of the 2nd respondent. The bank also filed ARC No.2709/2008 and an award was passed allowing the bank to recover the amount from the loanees and sureties and filed E.P 488/2010.
W.P(C).11987/2017
5
respondent, the principal debtor and the immovable property of the 3rd respondent will be sufficient to meet the balance due and
does not want to proceed against the complainant/surety. Thereafter, the Special Sale Officer of the bank conducted an enquiry for proceeding against the property of the 3rd respondent and the Special Sale Officer filed a report dated 1708-2016 stating that the 3rd respondent is a divorcee and his wife even though owned certain land, the 3rd respondent does not have any right in that property of his divorced wife.
“COMPLAINT No.616/1 6 B
ORDER
Advocate Sri. P. Subair Kunju Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submits that
W.P(C).11987/2017
6
proceedings against the immovable property of the first respondent/principal debtor is being taken by the recovery officer, that the immovable property will be sufficient to meet the balance debt and that therefore respondents 3 and 4 do not want to proceed against the complainant/surety. The submission made by the counsel for respondents 3 and 4 is recorded.
JUSTICE K.P. BALACHANDRAN, Upa Lok Ayukta”
“RP No. 23/16 in COMPLAINT No. 616/16 B
ORDER
Advocate Sri. N.P. Prabhakaran has filed review petition seeking review of the order date 13.06.2016 passed by this Forum. The order passed by this Forum is extracted below for reference.
"Advocate Sri. P. Subair Kunju Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submits that proceedings against the immovable property of the first respondent / principal debtor is being taken by the recovery officer, that the immovable property will be sufficient to meet the balance debt and that therefore respondents 3 and 4 do not want to
W.P(C).11987/2017
7
proceed against the complainant / surety. The submission made by the counsel for respondents 3 and 4 is recorded.
It was Advocate Sri. P. Subair Kunju who was counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 and now this RP is filed on behalf of respondents 3 and 4 by Advocate Sri. N.P. Prabhakaran who submits that now the Bank has engaged him to conduct the case on behalf of respondents 3 and 4. In the light of the order passed by this Forum on 13.06.2016 accepting and recording a responsible representation made by the counsel for respondents 3 and 4, change of vakkalath and finding out reasons to seek for a review is not maintainable and the grounds stated is not sufficient to admit a review of the order.
In the result, this RP is dismissed in limine.
JUSTICE K.P. BALACHANDRAN, UPA LOKAYUKTA”
W.P(C).11987/2017
8
that no useful purpose will be served in retaining the writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/S. Manikumar, Chief Justice
Sd/Shaji P. Chaly, Judge
sou.
W.P(C).11987/2017
9
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11987/2017
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF REQUISITION |
|---|---|
ISSUED UNDER SECTION 37 (2) OF THE KCS ACTDATED 14.9.2015. |
|
EXHIBIT P2 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT DATED7.8.2000. |
EXHIBIT P3 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN ARC NO.2709/2008 DATED 25.11.2008 ALONG WITHENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
EXHIBIT P4 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO.616/2016FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1STRESPONDENT DATED 19.2.2016. |
EXHIBIT P5 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN COMPLAINTNO.616/2016 DATED 22.2.2016 OF THE 1STRESPONDENT. |
EXHIBIT P6 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.6.2016 INCOMPLAINT NO.616/2016. |
EXHIBIT P7 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY |
THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER TO THE DEPUTYGENERAL MANAGER DATED 17.8.2016. |
|
EXHIBIT P8 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE R.P NO.23/2016 INCOMPLAINT NO.616/2016 FILED BY THE BANKBEFORE THE 1STRESPONDENT. |
EXHIBIT P9 |
A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.10.2016 INR.P NO.23/2016 IN COMPLAINT NO.616/2016. |
The Kollam District Co-operative Bank Ltd (represented by its General Manager), The Branch Manager, Superintendent (Special Recovery Cell), Kollam District Co-o
The Kerala Lok Ayukta
P.S. Suresh Babu
B. Bhuvanachandrann Pillai
4 K.G. Jayadevan Pillai
S.Manikumar
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court