Kerala High Court
Kerala State Road Transport ... vs K.C.Kesavan on 27 June, 2005
Bench: K.A.Abdul Gafoor, K.Hema
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA No. 1290 of 2005
1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
... Petitioner
2. THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF
3. THE ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER (CASH)
4. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,
Vs
1. K.C.KESAVAN,
... Respondent
2. K.K.MATHEW,
3. C.BEERANKUTTY,
4. K.P.SULAIMAN, S/O.MAMMU,
5. P.M.MATHAI GEORGE,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SC, KSRTC
For Respondent :SRI.P.P.SOMAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated : 27/06/2005
O R D E R
PL 55 TM 3 SP 2 BM 2 K.A. ABDUL GAFOOR & @@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA K.HEMA, JJ.@@ jAAAAAAAAAAA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA W.A.No.1290 of 2005 @@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Dated this the 27th day of June, 2005.@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA JUDGMENT@@ jEEEEEEEE ((HDR 0 {WA 1281/05}@@ AAAAAAAAAAAA :: # ::@@ jAAAAAAA )) HE 1 Abdul Gafoor, J.@@ EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE This writ appeal is filed by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation and its officials challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge which directs payment of provident fund dues and staff welfare fund amounts forthwith to respondents 1 to 5 in this appeal.
2.It is submitted by the counsel for the appellants that the purpose of this writ appeal is to remove that portion of the judgment in the writ petition, which directs payment of cost of Rs.1,500/= each to the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 5. The cost for filing a writ appeal will be more than the cost so ordered. Therefore, the decision to file an appeal is not a wise one. Moreover, the learned single Judge had already exercised the discretion by directing disbursement of amounts to a retired employees, who had been clamoring for the provident fund amount remitted by them, which cannot be delayed by the employer, on their retirement. Therefore, there was justification in that regard. We find no perversity in the exercise of such discretion to invite interference. The learned single Judge has given the direction taking into account the Division Bench judgment in W.A.No.289/01. Therefore, the writ appeal fails, dismissed. However, the cost ordered in the judgment impugned shall be limited to Rs.2,000/- in all.
SP 1 JN (K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR)@@ AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA JUDGE.@@ AAAAAAAAA (K.HEMA)@@ AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA JUDGE@@ AAAAAAAA sk/-
PA .......T.......T.......T.......T.......L.......T.......T.......T............J ((HDR 0 )) HE 2 SP 2 K.A.ABDUL GAFOOR &@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA K.HEMA, JJ.@@ jAAAAAAAAAAA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.A.No.1290 of 2005@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA JUDGMENT@@ jEEEEEEEE 27th June, 2005.@@ jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -