K.M.Madhusoodanan Namboodiri vs The Commissioner
2023 Latest Caselaw 8921 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
         MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945
                         W.P.(C) NO.14496 OF 2009
PETITIONER:

              K.M. MADHUSOODANAN NAMBOODIRI,
              SON OF K.M.GOVINDAN NAMBOODIRI,
              KIZHAKKEKKARA MANGULAM,
              P.O. CHALAKODE, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

              BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE COMMISSIONER,
              MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE.

     2        THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
              SREE RAYRAMANGALAM BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE,
              P.O. PILICODE, VIA. TRIKKARIPUR,
              KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
              SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
              SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
              SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
              SRI.K.R.SUNIL, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   -2-
W.P.(C) NO.14496 OF 2009


                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of August, 2023

This writ petition is filed seeking the retiral benefits to the

petitioner taking his date of birth as 15.06.1943 instead of

04.07.1941. Pursuant to an earlier direction of this Court, Exts.P9

and P10 orders were passed which are challenged in this writ

petition. An interim order was passed by this Court on 27.05.2009

in this writ petition to disburse the admitted retiral benefits.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent

submits that entire retiral benefits have been paid. Not satisfied,

the petitioner again pressed for certain amounts. This Court by

order dated 30.05.2023 directed the learned Counsel for the

petitioner to produce documents to substantiate his claim. Despite

two opportunities being given, no documents are produced.

In such circumstances, I do not find anything to dislodge the

findings in Exts.P9 and P10. Nothing remains to be considered in

this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

JUDGE bpr

W.P.(C) NO.14496 OF 2009

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14496/2009 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15.09.2006.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.3.2007.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT BOOK RELATING TO THE MALABAR DEVASWOM EMPLOYEES WELFARE FUND.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTORAL CARD ISSUED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.9323/2006 DATED 5.3.2009.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION WITHOUT THE ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS THEREON, DATED 1.4.2009.

EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE POST OFFICE EVIDENCING SENDING OF EXT-P6.

EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 6.4.2009 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 6.4.2009.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER ON 20.4.2009 TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 5.10.2009.