Kerala High Court
S.S.Satheesh vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited on 30 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(C).No.8242 OF 2021(E)
PETITIONER:
S.S.SATHEESH
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, KARTHIKA, J.P.LANE,
NEMAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 020
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI
RESPONDENTS:
1 BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED
REP.BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (FIN),
KERALA CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 GENERAL MANAGER,
NET WORK OPERATIONS CM, TAMILNADU, CIRCLE,
TRICHY-621 105
2 TNGICUBE TECHNOLOGIES RESOURCES INDIA (P) LTD.
T.C.15/120, B-STREET 29, ALTHARA NAGAR,
SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 010, REP.
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.MATHEWS K PHILIP, SC, BSNL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.8242 OF 2021(E)
2
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 letter issued
by the respondents, referring to Ext.P2 judgment,
directing him to pay a sum of Rs.73.61 lakhs saying
that the same is due from the 3 rd respondent Company.
2. Petitioner points out that he was a Director
of the 3rd respondent Company only till 06.10.2009
when he resigned from the Board of Directors and that
the proceedings for recovery referred to in Ext.P2
judgment related to an agreement executed on
10.08.2010 as evident from the judgment. It is also
pointed out that petitioner had approached this Court
earlier in W.P.(C).No.29382 of 2010 when the
respondent BSNL initiated proceedings against him.
This Court had, taking note of the agreement dated
10.08.2010, which was subsequent to the resignation of
the petitioner from the Company, directed the
respondents to consider the representation submitted
WP(C).No.8242 OF 2021(E)
by the petitioner, while directing to keep in abeyance
the further proceedings till then. According to the
petitioner no orders are passed thereafter and Ext.P4
order is issued without even giving a notice to
petitioner.
3. I heard Sri. K.M. Sathyanatha Menon, the
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri
Mathews K. Philip, learned Standing Counsel for the
BSNL.
4. From Ext.P4 order, it is seen that it has
been issued without hearing the petitioner. Though
respondents 1 and 2 refers to Ext.P2 judgment in their
order Ext.P4, petitioner was not a party to that writ
petition filed in 2013, referring to an agreement of
2010. Therefore Ext.P4 letter and the direction to
make payment therein are issued in gross violation of
the principles of natural justice. Therefore Ext.P4
shall stand set aside to the extent it relates to the
petitioner. It is made clear that the respondents
WP(C).No.8242 OF 2021(E)
would be be free to take action against the petitioner
in case there is any material which connects the
petitioner, taking note of the the fact that he has
already resigned from the Company as early as on
06.10.2009, after issuing a show cause notice and
affording him an opportunity of hearing on the same.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE
AS
WP(C).No.8242 OF 2021(E)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RETIREMENT DETAILS OF
THE PETITIONER WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT
COMPANY.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.3837 OF 2013 DATED 15.2.2013 OF
THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
13.12.2012 IN W.P.(C) NO.29382 OF 2012
OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.AO-
TR/MS/TNGICUBE/2020-21/22 DATED
25.2.2021 ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
