Kerala State Road Transport ... vs Mathai P.P
2023 Latest Caselaw 6099 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
        FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1945
                         RP NO. 287 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 40721/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3:

    1       KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
            TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY
            DEPUTY LAW OFFICER, PIN - 695023

    2       MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
            CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O.,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY DEPUTY LAW OFFICER - 695023

            BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN



RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT:

    1       MATHAI P.P., AGED 57 YEARS, S/O POTHEN, PALANIKULAM
            THADATHIL HOUSE, MALAKALLU P.O, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671532

    2       STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
            TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

            BY ADV K.I.SAGEER
            SRI RIYAL DEVASSY-GP



     THIS   REVIEW   PETITION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
09.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP NO. 287 OF 2023
                                    2


                                 ORDER

When this petition, seeking review of the judgment of

this Court dated 11.01.2023 in W.P.(C) No.40721/2022, was

considered by this Court on 29.05.2023, the following orders

were issued:

"The learned counsel for the Review Petitioner - Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) submits that this matter was unfortunately disposed of with certain others and that he was under the inadvertent impression that the issues are similar in all of them. He pointed out that, in fact, in this case, the writ petitioner had been terminated from service; and therefore, that he stands on a different footing from the petitioners in the other cases, which are part of the batch.

2. In response, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner -Sri.K.I.Sageer submitted that even if this is true, his client is still entitled to certain retiral benefits. He prayed that at least that be ordered to be paid to his client immediately.

3. Sri. Deepu Thankan - learned counsel for the review petitioner - KSRTC seeks time to verify if any payments are due to the writ petitioner in spite to the fact that he had been terminated from service.

List this case on 09.06.2023."

2. Today, Sri.Deepu Thankan - learned counsel for the

review petitioner, conceded that an amount of Rs.68,247/-

towards Provident Fund is eligible to the writ petitioner. He

added that this will be paid to him not later than three

months.

Recording the afore submissions, I allow this petition

and vacate the judgment sought to be reviewed; however, RP NO. 287 OF 2023

directing the respondents to ensure that the afore amount or

such other eligible amounts are paid to the writ petitioner

not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu