Roy T.Jose Antony vs State Of Kerala on 29 September, 2009

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

Roy T.Jose Antony vs State Of Kerala on 29 September, 2009

Bench: S.Siri Jagan

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP.No. 18143 of 2001(I)



1. ROY T.JOSE ANTONY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.V.GEORGE

                For Respondent  :SC,IDUKKI DCB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :29/09/2009

 O R D E R
                                 S. Siri Jagan, J.
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                           O.P. No. 18143 of 2001
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                  Dated this, the 29th September, 2009.

                                J U D G M E N T

The petitioner and respondents 6 to 8 were guarantors for loan amounts released to the 5th respondent by the 4th respondent-Co- operative Bank. Since the 5th respondent defaulted repayment of the loan amounts, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated. The amounts have been ordered to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner, who is a teacher in the St. Mary's Higher Secondary School, Kaliyar. The petitioner is aggrieved by such proceedings for recovery while the respondents 5 to 8 are not proceeded against. According to the petitioner, respondents 6 to 8 are close relatives of the 5th respondent, whereas the petitioner is only a neighbour. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:

"(i) Call for the entire records relating to the above case;

(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing Exts.P3 and P4 orders, issued by respondents 2 & 3 respectively as they are highly illegal, wrong and unsustainable.

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 not to initiate any coercive recovery steps against the petitioner, on the basis of the amounts due from the 5th respondent to the 4th respondent, Co-operative Bank."

2. I have considered the contentions of the parties.

3. The liability of the petitioner is not disputed. The amounts due to the bank is stated to be Rs. 45,374/-. The recovery from the petitioner's salary is at the rate of Rs. 4000/- p.m. In C.M.P. No. 29143/2001, this Court passed the following interim order:

"There will be an interim direction to recover only Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand) per month from the salary of the petitioner pending disposal of this O.P."

O.P. No. 18143/2001. -: 2 :-

More than eight years have gone by. The entire amounts due must have been realised by now if the amount has been recovered at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month. Therefore, there is no point in considering this matter on merits at this point of time.

Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to recover the amounts paid by him from respondents 5 to 8, this original petition is closed.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.

O.P. No. 18143/2001. -: 3 :-

S. Siri Jagan, J.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 18143 of 2001 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= J U D G M E N T 29th September, 2009.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court