N.V.Annakutty vs The Kombanadu Ksheerolpadaka ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10722 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
       THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 27TH ASWINA, 1945
                         WP(C) NO. 22984 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

           N.V.ANNAKUTTY,
           AGED 59 YEARS
           W/O. JOY, KANIYADAN HOUSE, KOMBANADU P.O, KRARIYELI,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 683546.

           BY ADV P.V.BABY

RESPONDENTS:

     1     THE KOMBANADU KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM
           NO.E-226(D),
           APCOS, KOMBANADU P.O, ERNAKULAM - 683546
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

     2     BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF THE KOMBANADU KSHEEROLPADAKA
           SAHAKARANA SANGAM NO. E-226(D),
           APCOS, KOMBANADU P.O, ERNAKULAM- 683546,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

     3     DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
           DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
           OF DIARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, KAKKANAD,
           ERNAKULAM-6820302.

     4     DIARY EXTENSION OFFICER,
           DIARY EXTENSION SERVICE UNIT, PARAKKADAVU BLOCK,
           KURUMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 683579.

           BY ADV P.N.MOHANAN


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION        ON
19.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 22984 OF 2022                    2



                                       JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following

reliefs:-

(i) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or directing calling for the records leading to Ext.P10 and P11 arbitration case No.1/2022 filed by the 1st respondent and to quash the same;

(ii) declare that the unilateral cancellation of Ext.P4 by the respondent society is illegal and liable to be rescinded in Ext.P8 petition filed by the petitioner before the 3rd respondent;

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing respondents 3 and 4 not to proceed on the basis of Ext.P10 and P11 against the petitioner and;

(iv) issue another writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction directing the 3rd respondent to complete the proceedings on the basis of Ext.P8 petition filed by the petitioner within a time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

(v) issue another writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to disburse to the petitioner retirement benefits to the tune of about Rs.10 lakhs, including gratuity, welfare fund, leave surrender for 300 days, bonus and PF etc within a stipulated period.

2. Sri. P.V. Baby, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

submits that while working as a paid Secretary in the 1st respondent

Society, disciplinary proceedings were initiated, and the same on its

conclusion resulted in an order of compulsory retirement. He states that

while so, a settlement was arrived at and towards settlement of all claims

and the petitioner was liable as per the terms to pay a sum of

Rs.56,177.15/-. Immediately thereafter, without notice to the petitioner,

the settlement agreement was cancelled. Challenging the cancellation of

settlement, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 complaint before the 3rd

respondent. He states that in response, the 3rd respondent has intimated

to the petitioner that an enquiry under Section 65 has been ordered in the

Society. He asserts that immediately thereafter, proceedings were initiated

before the Deputy Director, which is stated to be pending.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for the time being, the

limited request of the petitioner is for issuance of directions to the 3rd

respondent to finalise the proceedings on the basis of Ext.P8 complaint

filed by the petitioner in an expeditious manner.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the Society submits that

serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner herein, and the

settlement was cancelled as the officer who had signed the settlement was

not authorised. According to the learned counsel, proceedings have been

initiated before the 4th respondent, and the same is pending.

5. I have heard the learned Government Pleader who submitted

that if the proceedings are not finalized, necessary steps can be taken to

finalise the same.

In that view of the matter, without expressing anything on the

merits of the allegations, this Writ Petition is hereby disposed of with a

direction to the 3rd Respondent to finalize the proceedings pursuant to

Ext.P8 complaint if the same has not been finalized to date, as per

procedure, and in accordance with law.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE Sru

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22984/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 10/7/2020 ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DOMESTIC ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 24/10/2020 SUBMITTED BY THE ENQUIRY OFFICER.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISCIPLINARY SUBCOMMITTEE DATED 29/11/2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WITH DATE 01/12/2020.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DATED 9/9/2021 ARRIVED AT AFTER NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE PETITIONER PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY AND HONORARY SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY .

Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 8/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14/1/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P7 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY DATED 1/2/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P8 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 22/2/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26/2/2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P10 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ARBITRATION CASE NO.

1/2022 DATED 11/4/2022 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P11 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED NIL ISSUED IN ARC NO. 1/2022 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.10(C) DATED 04/10/2021 OF THE SOCIETY.