Kerala High Court
Joymol M.L vs K.S.R.T.C on 3 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 1002 OF 2018
PETITIONER/S:
JOYMON M.L.
AGED 56 YEARS
DRIVER (RETIRED),TRANSPORT OFFICE
KOTTAYAM, MLANKUZHY PUTHENPURA,
ATHIRAMPUZHA.P.O., KOTTAYAM- 686 562
BY ADV SMT.M.KABANI DINESH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR,TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
FORT,TRIVANDRUM- 695 023
2 THE DISTRICT TRANSOPRT OFFICER
K.S.R.T.C, KOTTAYAM- 686 001
BY ADVS.
SHRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION - KSRTC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P. (C) No.1002 of 2018 2
EASWARAN S. , J.
-------------------------
W.P. (C) No.1002 of 2018
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of April 2024
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ order or direction to the respondents to release the
retirement benefits of the petitioner forthwith with interest.
b. To declare that the petitioner is entitled to
retirement benefits with interest from the date of
retirement.
2. The petitioner, while working as Driver in the Kerala State Road
Transport Corporation (for short, the KSRTC) met with an accident on
24.12.2009 at Kozhipalam near Gudalur Police Station when the KSRTC
collided with a lorry having registration No. TN-43-Z-5877. Proceedings
were initiated against him which culminated in Ext.P3 memo of charges
and a penalty of barring of one increment was imposed on the
petitioner. The claim, in respect of which arose pursuant to the accident
of the vehicle in which the petitioner was the driver, was compromised
by the KSRTC with the insurance company for an amount of
Rs.55,629/-. Thereafter, when the petitioner retired from service, the
KSRTC refused to release the retirement benefits due to him and
decided to withhold an amount of Rs.37,437/- being the differential
cost of damages of Rs.93,066/-. It is aggrieved by the inaction on the
part of the KSRTC that, the present writ petition is filed.
3. This Court, by way of an interim order dated 15.3.2023, had
directed the KSRTC to take steps to disburse the admitted terminal
benefits payable to the petitioner within a period of three months.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant
to the said interim order, an amount of Rs.4,11,209/- was paid to the
petitioner and, that apart, no amounts were disbursed in this regard.
5. A statement has been filed by the learned counsel appearing
for the respondents, in which, it is stated that since the 2 nd respondent
has issued a letter on 09.1.2018 to the Executive Director, Vigilance
Section seeking clarification regarding the recovery of Rs.37,437/- ( the
difference between the actual cost of damage of Rs.94,066/- and
Rs.55,629/-, the amount allowed by the Insurance Company) the
terminal benefits due to the petitioner will be sanctioned and disbursed
immediately after getting the clarification from the Chief Office.
6. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion
that, the stand taken by the KSRTC to recover an amount of
Rs.37,437/-, which represents the differential amount of loss caused to
them on account of the damage caused in the accident, cannot be
accepted. It is futile for the KSRTC now to contend before this Court
that, after having settled the claim with the insurance company for
Rs.55,629/-, the petitioner is liable to make good for the loss. It is
pertinent to note that, as per Ext.P12 order, the petitioner has already
faced with the penalty proceedings and the penalty of barring one
increment was imposed. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that
there cannot be any double jeopardy in respect of the same cause of
action requires to be appreciated by this Court.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the KSRTC
to release all consequential monetary benefits due to the petitioner
after deducting an amount of Rs.4,11,209/-, which is paid pursuant to
the interim order passed by this Court, within a period of six months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1002/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.10.2009 OF
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.1.2010
SUSPENDING THE PETITIONER FROM SERVICE
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO AND CHARGE
SHEET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER VIDE
PROCEEDINGS NO. VLE 5-001231/2010 DATED
18.1.2010
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 9.2.2011
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P3 CHARGE
MEMO
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED UNDER THE
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 11.6.2014
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL DATED
1.9.2014
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER ON 28.10.2014 TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE
TALUK LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE KOTTAYAM
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT ARRIVED BETWEEN
THE PARTIES IN LOK ADALATH DATED 20.11.2015
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED
2.3.2016
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE SHOW CAUSE
NOTICE DATED 16.3.2016
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.5.2016 OF THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE)
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED
17.7.2017
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORDS OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
NO.SS.G5/629/22/D.OKTM (CHRY) DTD.16.9.2022
