T.T.Raman vs Forest Industries (Travancore) ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8885 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                     PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
                          TH
        THURSDAY, THE 7        DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
                           WP(C) NO. 6602 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            T.P.RAMAN
            AGED 67 YEARS
            S/O.PARAMESWARAN, THAZHATHU VEETTIL HOUSE, KOZHIPILLY
            P.O., VARAPETTY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK.

            BY ADV ALEXANDER JOSEPH



RESPONDENTS:

    1       FOREST INDUSTRIES (TRAVANCORE) LTD.
            REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THAIKKATTUKARA,
            ALUVA, PIN - 683 106.

    2       THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
            KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

    3       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

            BY ADVS.
            M.K.THANKAPPAN
            SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC, P.F.


            SRI V K SUNIL, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.6602/2021                        :2:




                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner had been working as an Operator Grade -I in

Forest industries Travancore Ltd., Aluva. In the month of

September 2009 petitioner was dismissed from service. The said

dismissal was assailed before the Labour Court resulting into

payment of retirement benefits with 25% back wages. The

aforementioned award was challenged before this Court and as per

the common judgment dated 25.1.2019, both the Writ Petitions

were disposed of with a direction that the workman would be

entitled to all other benefits as directed in the award without any

deduction as if he had retired from the service on the date of

superannuation. The management was directed to make the

payment within a period of one month. The workman was also

entitled to interest on the amount due to him i.e., retirement

benefits @9% per annum from the date of superannuation by

deducting the amount already paid.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submitted that the management as per the letter dated 16.3.2019

quantified the monitory benefits by issuing a cheque of

Rs.1,62,258/- including the EPF of Rs.7,831/- whereas the

petitioner is entitled to pension quantified as on the date of

retirement i.e., 30.11.2011. Thus it was obligatory for the

management to remit the contribution of both the employer and the

employees to the organisation with interest. In this regard a

request dated 4.10.2019 was submitted to the Managing Director,

Forest Industries, 1st respondent as well as Assistant Provident

Fund Commissioner.

3. The Assistant Provident Commissioner vide Ext.P4

communication dated 10.12.2019 informed the petitioner that the

complaint lodged by him is investigated, but no concrete action

has been taken.

4. Learned counsel for 1st respondent submits that

whatever the contribution was due has already been paid to the

petitioner. In case the petitioner wants their contribution, is

required to remit the amount including the contribution in the

prescribed form, so that the Company can take further proceedings.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of

respondent No.2 submits that the department would not be averse

in taking action on the complaint made by the petitioner as it has

already been registered with them in view of the acknowledgment

Ext.P4 in accordance with law and call both the petitioner and as

well as the management - 1 st respondent for vindication of the

grievance of the petitioner.

In view of the statement made, I dispose of the Writ Petition

by issuing direction to respondent No.2 to take a call on the request

of the petitioner Ext.P3 dated 4.10.2019 as the same is already

registered with them as per the communication dated 10.12.2019

Ext.P4. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment

in accordance with law.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE csl

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6602/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF AWARD DATED 08/04/2013 IN I D NO.36/2011 OF THE LABOUR COURT ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 25/01/2019 IN WPC NO.17380/2013 & 30968/2015

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/10/2019 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 10/12/2019 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 26/01/2021 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.

RESPONDENTS' DOCUMENTS:

ANNEXURE R1(a) : TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT DETAILS OF THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE R1(b) : TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.FIT/FIN/16/2014-

15/1282 DATED 25.11.2014.

ANNEXURE R1(c) : TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.FIT/FIN/16/2014-

15/1441 DATED 11.12.2014.

ANNEXURE R1(d) : TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.19 DATED 20.4.2014.

ANNEXURE R1(e) : TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.KR/KCH/110/REJECTION/ DATED 21.7.2014