Dr. S. Shanavas vs Pullanikat Suresh

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10555 Ker
Judgement Date : 11 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Dr. S. Shanavas vs Pullanikat Suresh on 11 April, 2024

Author: Amit Rawal

Bench: Amit Rawal

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
    THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
                        CON.CASE(C) NO. 1169 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.18701 OF 2018 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
           DR. S. SHANAVAS
           AGED 57 YEARS
           S/O. A. SALAHUDDIN, SALMA MANZIL, EDAKKULANGARA P.O
           KARUNAGAPPALY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690523

             BY ADVS.
             ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
             S.SREEDEV
             RONY JOSE
             LEO LUKOSE
             KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
             DERICK MATHAI SAJI



RESPONDENT/S:
1 PULLANIKAT SURESH
  AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,

  MANAGING DIRECTOR, STEEL & INDUSTRIAL FORGING LTD. ATHANI P.O,

  THRISSUR, PIN - 680581

2 ADDL.R2 SRI. APM MOHAMMED HANISH IAS
  AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,

  PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE,

  GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA
  -695033-----------------------------------------------------------------I

             BY ADVS.
             Saji Varghese T. G
             MARIAM MATHAI(M-92)


     THIS    CONTEMPT    OF   COURT    CASE     (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
HEARING ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1169 OF 2023
                                      2

                             JUDGMENT

This Court on 15.3.2023 had disposed of the writ petition observing that the petitioner was entitled to 50% of allowance and thereafter 75% of allowance and ordered that the suspension will be treated as an Engineer of the Traco cables. Therefore, entitled for subsistence allowance as per the conduct, discipline and Appeal Rules, Ext.P6 which was ordered to be paid within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

2. State preferred a writ appeal bearing No.1438 of 2023 before the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench vide judgment dated 15.3.2023, in paragraph 11 and 12 held as under:

11. Having considered the contentions advanced and in the light of Exts.P5 and P15, we are of the opinion that the contention of the petitioner that subsistence allowance was liable to be paid to him even though it is not provided in Ext.P6 cannot be said to be a totally fanciful contention.

It appears that the Government has been granting subsistence allowance even to persons appointed as Managing Director of State Government Undertakings as evidenced by Ext.P15. It is clear that payment of such allowance was at least in contemplation since Ext.P5 also speaks of recovery of excess from the subsistence allowance payable to the writ petitioner. True, the appointment of the petitioner as Managing Director cannot be said to be a deputation in the real sense of the term, it would be an independent appointment during the pleasure of the Government as contended by the Additional Advocate General. However, in view of the fact that it is admitted that there was a practice of grant of subsistence allowance to persons identically situated like CON.CASE(C) NO. 1169 OF 2023 3 the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the recovery of amounts already paid would not be justified.

12. The writ appeal is, therefore, ordered directing that amounts already paid as subsistence allowance on the strength of the judgment of the learned Single Judge shall not be recovered.

On perusal of the same, it is evident that whatever the amount as subsistence allowance had been paid, would not be recovered but not the balance amount. In this view of the matter, I am of the view that the contempt petition no longer survives and ordered to be closed.

Sd/-

sab                                         AMIT RAWAL
                                                JUDGE
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1169 OF 2023
                                    4

                 APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1169/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1            THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED

15.03.2023 IN W.P.(C) NO. 18701/2018 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.


Annexure A2            A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NUMBERED AS
                       SIFL:HRD:    01-609/23/43     AND    DATED

24.04.2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NUMBERED AS NO.8/P&A/543 AND DATED 13.04.2023 ISSUED BY THE ASST. MANGER, TRACO CABLES COMPANY LTD. TO THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (A & HRD) STEEL AND INDUSTRIAL FORGING LTD.

Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.04.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CONTEMNOR.

RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R(a) True copy of the GO (Rt) No.1519/11/ID dated 3.12.2011 Annexure R(b) True copy of GO(Rt) No. 64/2013/ID dated 11.1.2013 Annexure R (c) True copy of GO (Rt)No. 1000/15/ID dated 23.9.2015