High Court Kerala High Court

B.Gopinathan Pillai vs The Employees Provident Fund on 17 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
B.Gopinathan Pillai vs The Employees Provident Fund on 17 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 13183 of 2009(P)


1. B.GOPINATHAN PILLAI,AGED 62,S/O.
                      ...  Petitioner
2. R.RAJENDRA PRASAD,AGED 62,
3. R.CHANDRA MOHAM PILLAI,AGED 62,
4. K.PRABHAKARAN PILLAI,AGED 60,
5. G.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR,AGED 60,S./O.
6. G.GOPALAN,S/O.CHIPPAN,VILLIKKULAM,
7. SREEKUMAR,AGED 62,S/O.NEELAKANTAN,
8. JACOB JOHN,AGED 60,SON OF YONANNA KUTTY,
9. C.K.SIVANANDAN,AGED 65,S/O.M.KUMARAN,

                        Vs



1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE COMMISSIONER,THE OFFICE OF THE

3. THE REVOVERY OFFICER,

4. THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY,

5. THE REGISTRAR / INDUSTRIES GENERAL

6. QETCOS LTD,UMAYANALLOOR,,KOLLAM

7. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :17/06/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
         W.P.(C) NOs. 13183, 13808 & 14707 OF 2009
        ===============================

             Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

These writ petitions are filed by the retired employees of the

QETCOS Ltd., Kollam, a Co-operative Society.

2. In these writ petitions, what they are asking for is a

direction to the Society to pay them the gratuity and also the

arrears of salary utilizing the funds now allotted by the

Government of Kerala.

3. The society has filed counter affidavit, from which it

would appear that on account of the successive losses suffered by

the society, 129 employees retired from 1992 onwards are to be

paid the DCRG. Dealing with the claim of the petitioners that their

liability should be settled utilizing the amounts sanctioned by the

Government, Society contends that the amount was sanctioned

by the Government as per Government order dated 21/1/2009 for

settlement of its dues with the Co-operative Banks in terms of the

one time settlement scheme announced by the Bank. It is stated

that the amounts having been allotted for a specified purpose,

cannot be diverted for any other purpose. Society also submits

WPC 13183,13808 & 14707/09
:2 :

that once its liability to the Bank is settled, the society will be

reviving its activities and shall take expeditious steps for settling

the liabilities of its retired employees. It is stated that following

the priority in the order of the date of retirement, liabilities will be

settled within an out of time limit of three years.

4. Admittedly, Society has been suffering losses. The

liability is also outstanding to Banks including Co-operative Banks.

As pointed out by the Society, by Government order dated

21/1/2009, an amount of Rs.138.32 lakhs was sanctioned, but

however, the same was for the specific purpose of discharging the

liability to the Co-operative Banks. If so, the claim of the

petitioners for discharging their liabilities utilizing the aforesaid

amount cannot be considered. However, that does not mean that

the liability of the retired employees can be deferred for all time

to come.

5. Having regard to the fact that if society is now called

upon to discharge the liability, that will be putting an end to the

society’s, working resulting in its winding up, which cannot be of

benefit to anyone. I am not prepared to issue such a positive

direction. This is all the more so since the liability of 129

WPC 13183,13808 & 14707/09
:3 :

employees who have retired from 1992 remains unsettled.

Therefore, taking a pragmatic view of the matter, I feel it is only

reasonable that the society should take steps for discharging the

liability of the retired employees in the order of priority taking the

date of retirement as the criteria. It is directed that such

settlement shall be effected at any rate within 3 years from today.

Writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp