Allowed

Sailesh Kumar S v. Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation Ltd.

Kerala HC2 Jul 2024WP(C)/11406/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A warehouse manager of the Beverages Corporation challenged fixation and recovery of 10% of losses caused by other employees' misconduct. Relying on earlier judgments of the Court holding such liability unsustainable, the writ petition was allowed; the liability-fixing communication was quashed and recovery ordered refunded with interest.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P2 quashed insofar as it fixes liability on the petitioner; respondents directed to refund the recovered amount with 6% per annum interest within two months.

Sailesh Kumar S Vs Kerala State Beverages (M&M)… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2024 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1946
W.P.(C) NO.11406 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

SAILESH KUMAR S, AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O G. SUBRAMANIAN, MANAGER (FINANCE SECTION),
KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M&M) CORPORATION, BEVCO TOWER,
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
RESIDING AT: PUTHUMANGALATH, AMRITHAPURI P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY P.O, KOLLAM, PIN – 690 546
BY ADV T.N.SREEKALA

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M&M) CORPORATION LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 033
2CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M&M) CORPORATION LTD.,
BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 033
3THE INTERNAL AUDITOR,
KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M&M) CORPORATION LTD.,
BEVCO TOWER, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 003

¶9

SRI. T. NAVEEN, SC

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

¶12

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

The present writ petition challenges the fixation of liability and

¶15

subsequent recovery from the petitioner, who serves as a Manager in the 1^st respondent Corporation, amounting to Rs. 41,417/-. This liability represents 10% of the losses incurred by the respondent Corporation due to misconduct committed by other employees in FL-01 shops, as per Circular No. KSBC/IA/042/2017-18 issued by the 2^nd respondent (Ext.P1).

¶16

The petitioner was served with Ext.P2 communication

¶17

along with the stock liability statement, with a direction stating that

¶18

if the liability amount is not remitted on or before 31.08.2019, the amount would be recovered with interest from the salaries and

¶19

other allowances without further notice. Thus, the petitioner was

¶20

required to pay off the alleged liability in instalments, totaling Rs.

¶21

¶22

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶23

42,000/-(Exts. P3 to P9). The Ext.P1 circular was reviewed and

¶24

passed Ext.P10 circular exempting the warehouse managers from

¶25

their liability only with prospective effect. Under the above

¶26

circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the

¶27

following reliefs:

¶28

(a) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction to call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P2 to quash the same so far it fixes liability of Rs. 41417/- to the petitioner;

¶29

(b) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction to call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P10 and to quash the same to the extent its prospective operation;

¶30

(c) Declare that Exhibit P10 Circular have retrospective effect from the date of issuance of Exhibit P1 Circular;

¶31

(d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to reimburse the recovered amount of Rs.42000/- (Forty two thousand Rupees only) the petitioner with 12% interest;

¶32

(e) Award costs of and incidental to this Writ Petition (Civil);

¶33

(f) Pass such other orders or directions as deemed fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶35

learned standing counsel for the respondents.

¶36

¶37

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶38

4. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the issue of

¶39

fixing liability on the warehouse manager came before the court in

¶40

W.P.(C) No.34501 of 2019, and this Court in Paragraph 6 of the

¶41

judgement held as follows(Ext.P11):

¶42

6. “From the Circular it is clear that, though belatedly, the respondents realised that the Warehouse Mangers have no direct involvement in the liability occurring in FL-1 shops on account of shortage in liquor stocks/cash due to the misappropriation and illegal activities of some of the employees. Issuance of the Circular exempting the Warehouse Mangers from liability amounts to acceptance of the challenge raised against Exhibit P1 Circular. The respondents having come to the definite conclusion that the warehouse managers cannot be held responsible for the shortage of stock/cash in FL-1 shops, the benefit of the Circular should be extended to the Warehouse Mangers on whom liability is fixed for the unscrupulous activities of the employees. Surprisingly, the exemption from liability is made prospective in the Circular dated 23.3.2022. The reasoning that had prompted the respondents to issue the Circular exempting Warehouse Managers will be applicable to the persons already fixed with the liability. Otherwise, it will amount to unreasonable classification and discrimination”.

¶43

5. The petitioner also produced another judgement of this

¶44

court in W.P.(C) No.18582 of 2022, marked as Ext.P12. The relevant

¶45

portion of the judgement is extracted hereunder;

¶46

“Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the Judgments of this Court in WP(C).34501/2019 as well as the directions in the reported judgment in Ramakrishnan P.K v. Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation Ltd. and

¶47

¶48

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶49

others [2022 (2) KHC 503], there will be a direction to the respondents to release the amounts recovered from the petitioner's gratuity with 8% interest from the date of recovery till date of payment. With regard to the amount recovered from the other service benefits to the petitioner, the same shall also be released with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. All amounts shall be calculated and disbursed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment”.

¶50

In light of the above judgments, the petitioner is entitled to

¶51

succeed.

¶52

In the result, the writ petition is allowed as follows;

¶53

a) Ext.P2 is quashed insofar as they fix liability on the

¶54

petitioner.

¶55

b) The respondents are directed to disburse the amount

¶56

recovered from the salary with interest at the rate of

¶57

6% per annum within two months.

BASANT BALAJI,

JUDGE

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶63

`PETITIO`	`NER EXHIB`	`APPENDIXOF WP(C) 11406/2024` `ITS:`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CIRCULAR` `NO. KSBC/IA/042/2017-18, DATED 20.12.2017,`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`THE PETITIONER WAS SERVED A COMMUNICATION` `BEARING NO.KSBC/IA/STOCK LIABILITY/058/2018-` `2019, DATED 16.08.2019 ALONG WITH THE STOCK` `LIABILITY STATEMENT OF KSBC FL 01-SHOPS FOR` `THE YEAR 2018-2019, FROM 18.08.2018 TO` `30.11.2018, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT,`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`RECEIPT NO.838, DATED 03.05.2021 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.10000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`RECEIPT NO.886, DATED 06.08.2021 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.6000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`RECEIPT NO.4770, DATED 10.09.2021 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.10000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`RECEIPT NO.581, DATED 06.11.2021 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.4000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`RECEIPT NO.4452, DATED 03.12.2021 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.4000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`RECEIPT NO.4472, DATED 01.01.2022 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.3000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`RECEIPT NO.754, DATED 18.03.2022 FOR AN` `AMOUNT OF RS.5000/-, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE` `OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CIRCULAR` `BEARING` `NO.KSBC/IA/042/2021-22,` `DATED` `23.03.2022,`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`THE PETITIONER THEN CAME ACROSS A JUDGMENT` `DATED 30.03.2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P` `(C) NO. 34501/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, FILED` `BY SIMILARLY SITUATED EMPLOYEES, A TRUE COPY` `OF THE SAME`

¶64

¶65

WPC. No. 11406/2024

¶66

Exhibit P12A TRUE COPY OF ANOTHER JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 18582 OF 2022
DATED 02.11.2022.

Sailesh Kumar S v. Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sailesh Kumar S v. Kerala State Beverages (M&M) Corporation Ltd.

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

K a Shamla Vs State of Kerala

Akhil Dev Vs State of Kerala

K.M.Cherian Vs Thodupuzha Taluk Co-Operative Employees Co-Operative Society Ltd. NO.I-112

Arun R. Vs State of Kerala

Chandrika.D., Vs Regional Cancer Centre (Rcc)

T.V. Suresh Vs Kerala State Textile Corporation Limited.