Sindhu G v. Antony Chacko
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/17TH POUSHA, 1936 Con.Case(C).No. 1272 of 2014 (S) -------------------------------------------- THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.10939/2011 DATED 23-10-2013 PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION:
------------------------------------------------------------------------- SINDHU G, AGED 40 YEARS W/O. THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, NINI NIVAS NEAR CHILDRENS PARK, THEVALLY, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT/FIRST RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SRI. ANTONY CHACKO, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. BY ADV.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 1272 of 2014 (S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE I :
TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE WRIT PETITION, W.P(C) NO.10939/2011 DATED 30/03/2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ANNEXURE II:
:
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/10/2013 IN W.P(C)NO.10939/2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
ANNEXURE III:
:
TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 25/11/2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE IV:
:
TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P A TO JUDGE MJL
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
--------------------------- Cont.Case (C)No.1272 of 2014 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had produced a proceedings issued by the Personnel Officer of the Corporation, dated 19/12/2014, to the effect of according sanction for payment of Rs.29,220/-(Rupees Twenty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty only) to the petitioner, being the DCRG due in respect of the service of deceased Sri.K. Balakrishna Pillai. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits receipt of the cheque/draft for the above said amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the amount ordered for payment is not covering the full benefits due with respect to service of the deceased person. Therefore it is contended that there is no full compliance of the judgment.
2. In Annexure II judgment this court only directed the 1st respondent to consider the issue regarding
Cont.Case (C)No.1272 of 2014 2 payment of retiral benefits due with respect to service of the deceased Sri.K.Balakrishna Pillai and to take a decision on the basis of the request made by the petitioner. Evidently, the respondent had taken a decision and paid the amount which is found due according to them. If the petitioner has got any dispute with respect to quantification of the amount or that any other benefits is due, it is left open to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedy in appropriate proceedings. This court do not find any reason to proceed further in this Contempt of Court Case.
Therefore the Contempt of Court Case is hereby closed, subject to liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner as mentioned above.
Sd/-C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE MJL