Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing T.R.Sambasivan Nair vs The Keral State Co-Operative Employees on 6 November, 2009

Managing Director, Neyyattinkara ... vs Sivakumar on 6 October, 2022

In the above circular reference was in fact made to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WA.No.1332/2012 (TR.Sambasivan Vs. The Kerala State Co operative Employees Pension Board & anr) which had ultimately led to the issuance of the above Circular. I do not propose to burden this order with the salient features of the Circular issued in terms of the directions issued by the Division Bench. But one Clause in the Circular may have to be mentioned which relates to the liability to pay interest for delayed payment by the offending Society/Bank. In Clause (4) it has been mentioned that if any Society commits delay in payment of the contribution to the Pension Board the interest payable for such delay shall not be borne by the Society; but the same shall be recovered from the members of the Managing Committee and the Chief Executive through surcharge proceedings. This clause was incorporated in strict compliance of the direction issued by the Division Bench. Addl. Respondent no.3 shall ensure that W.P.(C)No.37752 of 2017 & 37791 of 2017 12 the above clause no.4 is not overlooked or ignored in this case."
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S P Chaly - Full Document

K.J.Joy vs The Nedumudy Village Service ... on 24 June, 2022

3. Sri.M.Sasindran - learned Standing Counsel for the 5th respondent - Board, submitted that though Clause 38 of the 'Pension Scheme' authorises his client to recover the amounts from the Society, there WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020 4 is a judgment of this Court, namely Sambasivan Nair.T.R v. Kerala State Co- operative Employees Pension Board and another [2012(3) KHC 518], which permits such recovery from the President and Secretary of the Society. He added that, however, if this Court is inclined to direct his client to recover the amounts as per Clause 38 of the 'Pension Scheme', he will not stand in the way of appropriate orders being issued, provided the competent Recovery Authority also co-operates.
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - D Ramachandran - Full Document

P. Hamza vs Kerala Stateco-Operative Employees' on 26 December, 2011

The parties are at variance as to whether the respective shares of the employer and the employee have been remitted to the Pension Board or not. It remains to be seen whether the share of the employee has already been paid directly as Provident Fund. It requires to be probed as to whether the share of the employer has been remitted to the Pension Board or not. The third respondent Joint Registrar is at any rate empowered to conduct an enquiry and issue appropriate directions. {See Sambasivan Nair T.R. Vs. Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board and another [2012 (3) KHC 518 (DB)]}.
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - V Chitambaresh - Full Document
1