Kerala State Road Transport ... vs Kerala State Road Transport ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1600 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

                                  &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

     FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 25TH POUSHA, 1942

                        WA.No.103 OF 2021
AGAINST THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 12.10.2020 IN WP(C) 21414/2020(B)
                     OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:
          1  KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
             REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
             TRANSPORT BHAVAN,FORT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
             PIN-695023.

         2    THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
              KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
              KOTTARAKKARA DEPOT, KOTTARAKKARA.P.O,
              PIN-695023, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

         3    THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(VIGILANCE),
              KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, FORT,
              TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
              FORT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695023.

         4    ENQUIRY OFFICER(THIRUVANANTHAPURAM),
              KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
              FORT, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695023.

         5   ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
             KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
             KARUNAGAPPALLY DEPOT, KOLLAM DISTRICT,PIN-690518.
             BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SAJAN
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
             P.S.ANIL KUMAR
             SON OF SREEDHARAN, AGED 59 YEARS, VEHICLE SUPERVISOR,
             KSRTC, KOTTARAKKARA DEPOT,RETIRED ON 31.5.2017,
             RESIDING AT PADMA MANDIRAM,
             SOORANADU.P.O, KOLLAM,PIN-690522.

             SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN
     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A No.103 of 2021
                                        2


               ALEXANDER THOMAS & T.R.RAVI, JJ.
               ==================================
                            W.A No.103 of 2021
               (arising out of the interim order dated 12.10.2020
                          in W.P(C) No.21414 of 2020)
               ==================================
                       Dated this the 15th day of January, 2021

                                 JUDGMENT

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

The aforecaptioned Writ Appeal has been filed by all the

respondents in W.P(C)No.21414/2020 filed by the sole respondent

herein, so as to impugn the interim order dated 12.10.2020 rendered

by the learned Single Judge in W.P(C)No.21414/2020.

2. Heard Sri.T.P.Sajan, learned Standing Counsel for the

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) appearing for the

appellants/respondents in the W.P(C) and Sri.K.P.Rajeevan, the

learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent in the appeal/writ

petitioner. The respondent herein (referred hereinafter as the writ

petitioner, for continuance), was an employee of the appellant KSRTC

and he had retired from service on 31.05.2017.

3. Shorn off all the unnecessary details, it appears that the

appellant-KSRTC has issued Ext.P7 notice dated 28.09.2017, directing

the writ petitioner to show cause, as to why an amount of Rs.1,18,057/- W.A No.103 of 2021

shall not be recovered from his Death Cum Retirement Gratuity

(DCRG). The case of the appellants is that thereafter, the appellants

had considered Ext.P8 explanation submitted by the writ petitioner in

response to Ext.P7 show cause notice and then thereafter has issued

the impugned Ext.P9 order dated 21.10.2017 ordering that the said

amount of Rs.1,18,057/- shall be recovered from the Death Cum

Retirement Gratuity of the writ petitioner. It is common ground that

the balance amount of the DCRG after deducting the said amount

covered by Ext.P9 has already been disbursed to the writ petitioner by

the appellant-KSRTC, in compliance with the directions issued by this

Court in Ext.P6 judgment dated 28.06.2017 in W.P(C)No.21205/2017

filed by the respondent herein/writ petitioner herein, by paying the

said admitted DCRG amount.

4. The instant writ petition has been filed on 21.09.2020 with

the following prayers.

"i) Call for the records leading to this case and issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exhibits P5, P7 and P9.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to disburse to the petitioner to reimburse Rs.1,18,057/- with interest immediately.

iii) Issue such other orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit to issue in the circumstances of the case."

W.A No.103 of 2021

5. The learned Single Judge at admission stage has passed the

impugned order dated 12.10.2020 in this W.P(C), directing that there

shall be an interim order, as prayed for, for a period of six weeks. The

interim order prayed for is to direct the KSRTC authorities to disburse

the writ petitioner, the said entire amount of Rs.1,18,057/- covered by

the impugned Ext.P9 order.

6. Both sides have been heard and they have made their rival

submissions in the matter. One of the submissions made by

Sri.T.P.Sajan, learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC appearing for

the appellants is to the effect that apart from the merits of the matter,

it is to be noted that it is not right and proper to grant the present

interim order in effect amounted to grant the main reliefs and prayers

sought for in the writ petition.

7. After hearing both sides and after anxious consideration of

the rival pleas, we are of the considered view that it may not be right

and proper for us to get into the various submissions made by on either

side regarding the merits of the main controversy, which is to be

adjudicated and determined in the main writ petition. Therefore, we

will caution ourselves, so as to desist from entering into that arena

regarding the merits of the controversy. However, after hearing both W.A No.103 of 2021

sides, we are of the view that the interim order in the instant case

amounts to granting the main prayers in the main writ petition and

therefore, that matter alone might require consideration in this appeal.

8. Sri.T.P.Sajan, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State

Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) appearing for the appellants

would submit that he has already prepared the counter affidavit to be

filed by the respondents in the W.P(C) and that the same has been sent

to the competent authority of the KSRTC for getting approval and

thereafter, the same will be filed immediately and it is instructed that

the document will be filed within 7 to 10 days.

9. Sri.K.P.Rajeevan, learned counsel appearing for the sole

respondent in the appeal/writ petitioner submits that his party will

immediately file reply affidavit, if required to the said counter affidavit,

within one week thereafter. Therefore, taking into account the nature

of the controversy and also taking into account the fact that the writ

petitioner is a pensioner who was retired from service as early as on

31.05.2017, in the fitness of things that the main matter in the W.P(C)

is disposed of, without much delay.

10. Taking into account these aspects, it is ordered that the

impugned interim order dated 12.10.2020 rendered in W.A No.103 of 2021

W.P(C)No.21414/2020, will stand set aside. The Registry may list the

W.P(C)No.21414/2020 in the petition list, for disposal on 16.02.2021

We would request the learned Single Judge to bestow consideration for

the disposal of the main matter in the W.P(C), as early as possible. The

respondents in the W.P(C)/appellants-KSRTC will ensure that the

counter affidavit in the W.P(C) is filed, without any further delay, at

any rate, within 10 days and the writ petitioner may ensure that the

reply affidavit thereto, if any, is filed within a week thereafter, etc.

With these observations and directions, the above appeal will

stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI, JUDGE

vgd