Roy S Johnson vs M.T.Sukumaran
2021 Latest Caselaw 16903 Ker

Con.Case(C) No.870/2021                     1/2

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                          PRESENT
                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
            Thursday, the 12th day of August 2021 / 21st Sravana, 1943
              CONTEMPT CASE(C) NO. 870 OF 2021(S) IN WP(C) 446/2021
   PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WPC:

           ROY S.JOHNSON, S/O. JOHNSON DAVID, AGED 58 YEARS,
           RESIDING AT VAYALIL PUTHENPURAYIL, PANANGAD,
           PUNALUR P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 691 305.
           (SUPERINTENDENT, KSRTC, ALUVA DEPOT RETIRED ON 31-07-2019).

         BY ADV SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN.
   RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT IN THE WPC:

           SHRI.M.T. SUKUMARAN,
           EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, (VIGILANCE) KSRTC,
           TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 023.

           SRI.T.P. SAJAN, STANDING COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT.


        This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
   12.08.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:

                                                             P.T.O.
 Con.Case(C) No.870/2021                       2/2



                                 SUNIL THOMAS, J.
                                =================
                                C.O(C).No.870 of 2021
                                =================
                          Dated this the 12th day of August, 2021

                                          ORDER

When the matter was taken up, learned Standing Counsel for the

KSRTC submitted that, initially pension papers could not be finalized,

since service record could not be traced out. A duplicate register has

now been prepared. It has been submitted before the Audit Board.

Accordingly, decision is likely to be taken without much delay. This is

recorded.

It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that, order has

not been implemented on the premise that the KSRTC has filed a

review petition. The premise on which the review petition has been

filed is that, the right to proceed against the petitioner in accordance

with law has not been reserved in the judgment. It is made clear that,

even without a specific right being reserved, since the judgment is

based on technical reasons, judgment will not preclude KSRTC from

initiating the appropriate action, independently, on any misconduct

alleged, notwithstanding the judgment dated 21.01.2021. Report

compliance. Post on 10.09.2021.

        h/o.                                           Sd/-

                                                    SUNIL THOMAS
                                                        Judge

        Sbna/




12-08-2021                      /True Copy/                         Assistant Registrar