Kerala High Court
Viswanathan.V vs The Kerala Advocates Clerks Welfare ...
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2017/9TH JYAISHTA, 1939
WP(C).No. 16300 of 2012 (J)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
----------
VISWANATHAN.V,AGED 49 YEARS,
S/O.MEENAKSHI AMMA, VENGASSERY HOUSE,
SREENIKETH, P.O.VELUTHOORE, THRISSUR, PIN 680016.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE KERALA ADVOCATES CLERKS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE
REP. ITS SECRETARY, T.C.NO.26/580(1), SERA-24,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. C.P.PAULSON,
S/O.PORINCHU, CHIRIYANKANDATHU HOUSE,
NEDUPUZHA DESOM, KANIMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR-680001.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI
R2 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 30-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
K.V.
WPC 16300 OF 2012:
------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
EXHIBIT-P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR
RECOGNISITION AS AN ADVOCATE CLERK BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 1/9/04.
EXHIBIT-P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 1/9/04.
EXHIBIT-P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR WELFARE FUND
MEMBERSHIP SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT
DATED 1/9/04.
EXHIBIT-P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 1/9/04 REGARDING THE NOMINEE.
EXHIBIT-P5. A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER OF THE LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY DATED 16/9/04.
EXHIBIT-P6. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
DATED 18/11/2010.
EXHIBIT-P7. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT
DATED 17/8/2010.
EXHIBIT-P8. A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENTS OF DEFENSE OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 29/11/2010 BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT-P9.A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE PETITIONER
DATED 3/6/2011.
EXHIBIT-P10.A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE HON'BLE M L A,
THRISSUR DATED 16/3/2011.
EXHIBIT-P11.A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE UNDER
SECRETARY OF THE SECRETARIAT, DATED 21/12/2010.
EXHIBIT-P12.A TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT AND THE ORDER OF THE
FIRST RESPONDENT WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 9/4/2012.
EXHIBIT-P13.A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 19/4/2012.
EXHIBIT-P14.A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT
DATED 15/3/2010.
EXHIBIT-P15.A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P15
DATED 30/3/2010.
EXHIBIT-P16.A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION WITH COVERING LETTER OF
THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 22/6/2012.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
-----------------------
R2(A) TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE
CHAIRMAN, KERALA ADVOCATE WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE.
-2-
-2-
WPC 16300 OF 2012:
-----------------
R2(B) TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 1/7/2010 MADE BEFORE THE
INFORMATION OFFICER OF 1ST RESPONDENT COMMITTEE ALONG WITH ITS
REPLY DATED 2/8/10.
R2(C) TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 9/8/2012 TO THE APPLICATION
DATED 27/7/12.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
K.V.
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 16300 of 2012
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of May, 2017
J U D G M E N T
1.The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P12 order of the Kerala Advocates' Clerks Welfare Fund Committee, the 1st respondent herein, under which it is ordered that the period from 16.09.2004 to 24.05.2006 shall not be reckoned for the purpose of the welfare fund as far as the petitioner is concerned for the reason that the petitioner was working as a personal staff attached to the former Speaker of the Kerala Legislative Assembly during this period.
2.The petitioner alleges that this exclusion is contrary to the provisions of the Kerala Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 2003 (for short, "the Act"). According to the petitioner, even if it is taken that he was working as a personal staff of the former Speaker of the Kerala Legislative Assembly for this period, he will be entitled W.P.(C) No. 16300 of 2012 ..2..
to the benefits of the welfare fund on account of the specific provisions of the statute. He points out certain provisions of the statute and challenges Ext.P12 as being unreasonable, illegal and unlawful.
3.I have heard Mr.Sreekumar G. (Chelur), learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.T.A.Shaji, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr.V.Vincent Didacose on behalf of the 1st respondent; and Mr.C.A.Chacko, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
4.Even though there are several contentions and assertions in this writ petition, I do not think it will be necessary for me to enter into a conclusive evaluation of the same since I notice that the petitioner himself has preferred Ext.P13 review against the order impugned herein invoking the provisions of the Act.
5.Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent, at this point, brings my notice to Ext.P16, wherein it appears that the committee has cryptically replied to Ext.P13 that the review application cannot be W.P.(C) No. 16300 of 2012 ..3..
considered. However, I am of the view that notwithstanding this, a proper resolution of the issue between the parties and perhaps, a quietus to the issue can be obtained only if the committee considers the review application in its proper perspective. For this purpose alone, I deem it appropriate that the committee shall reconsider Ext.P13 review after following the due procedure.
6.At this time, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent says that the 2nd respondent has also filed an appeal against the impugned order herein before the committee, which has been produced as Ext.R2(a) along with the counter affidavit. He says that all the objections of his client are detailed in the appeal and that if Ext.P13 is to be considered by the committee, his appeal may also be directed to be considered along with the same.
7.In such circumstances and for the reasons I have recorded above, I set aside Ext.P16 and direct the 1st W.P.(C) No. 16300 of 2012 ..4..
respondent, the Kerala Advocates' Clerks Welfare Fund Committee, to take up Ext.P13 review, consider it and dispose it of, along with Ext.R2(a) appeal preferred by the 2nd respondent, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent as expeditiously as possible, but, not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE bka/-