Shylaja v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/21ST ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 10718 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:
----------- SHYLAJA AGED 50 YEARS W/O.MURALI M.K., MEKKATH HOUSE, PUTHUR P.O.
THRISSUR DISRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENTS:
------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.680001
2. THE DEPUTY TAHILDAR REVENUE RECOVERY, THRISSUR-680020.
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
PARK HOUSE, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR.680001
4. PUSPA, AGED 52 YEARS W/O.LATE BALAN, PORATHUKARANHOUSE, AMBALLOOR VARAKKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.
5. JITHIN, AGED 18 YEARS S/O.LATE BALAN, PORATHUKARAN HOUSE, AMBALLOOR VARAKKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.
SRI.JIKKU JACOB, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R3 BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE R4&5 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) R4&5 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN R BY SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR,SC,UNITED INDIA INSU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RKC
WP(C).No. 10718 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS --------------------- EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WCC NO.381/2004 DATED 6/10/2009 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 12/1/2010 PRODUCED BY THE CLAIMANT BALAN @ BALAKRISHNAN IN WCC NO.381/2004 BEFORE THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24/1/2014. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S.7 OF THE RR ACT DATED 24/1/2014.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL RKC TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE
P.V.ASHA, J.
W.P.(C) No.10718 of 2014 Dated this the 13th day of October, 2015
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P3 and P4 proceedings for revenue recovery of the amount awarded in W.C.C No.381 of 2004 in the Court of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thrissur, in favour of late Balan. The proceedings are seen initiated on requisition by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation.
2.
Respondents 4 and 5 are the wife and son of the deceased workman. Learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submitted that the workman had already received the amount due from the petitioner-employer as per Ext.P1 award, directly and Ext.P2 is the receipt issued by the workman. In view of the fact that the amount covered by Ext.P1 is already paid, it is not necessary to proceed against the employer.
3. I heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
4. All parties submit that the deceased workman was paid the award amount and there is no grievance for respondents 4
W.P.(C) No.10718 of 2014 :2:
and 5, the legal heirs of the applicant before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the amount due from them was already deposited. Thus it is clear that Exts.P3 and P4 proceedings were initiated apparently because the employer paid the amount directly, instead of remitting it in the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and in fact there was no circumstance to resort to such proceedings.
Therefore this writ petition is allowed directing that proceedings based on Exts.P3 and P4 shall stand closed. Sd/- P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
rkc