N.Ramakrishna Pillai vs the Director of Coir Development

N.Ramakrishna Pillai vs The Director of Coir Development

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Sep 14, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1556030

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1556030
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Decided On: Sep 14, 2022
Case Number: WP(C)/28242/2010

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

N.Ramakrishna Pillai

Respondent

The Director of Coir Development

Excerpt

.....following: -2-p.v.kunhikrishnan, j.====================================================== w.p.(c) no. 28242 of 2010 ============================================================= dated this the 14th day of september, 2022judgmentthe above writ petition is filed with following prayers:“\a) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the respondents to sanction and disburse gratuity, provident fund and other retiral benefits and one year salary to the petitioner within a time limit prescribed by this honourable court with 12% interest with effect from his date of retirement till the realisation of the amount.b) to declare that the petitioner is eligible and entitled to receive gratuity, provident fund and such other retiral benefits and one year's salary with 12% interest with effect from his date of retirement till the realization of the same and denial of the same or delay in paying the benefits is highly arbitrary, malafide, illegal and unconstitutional.c) to issue any other writ, order or direction as this honoruable court deems fit and proper in the case with cost of the proceedings.” -3-2. the grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not sanctioning and disbursing the gratuity, provident fund and other retirement benefits.3. when this writ petition came up for consideration,the counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 submitted that respondents 2 and 3 already filed an arc before the assistant registrar, coir project office, alappuzha claiming the amount due from the petitioner. the petitioner is a party in that proceedings. if that be so, till the arc is finally disposed of there cannot be a direction from this court to disburse the amount. granting liberty to the petitioner to approach this court again after the disposal of arc, this writ petition is closed. sd/- p.v.kunhikrishnan judge das

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 23RD BHADRA, WP(C) NO. 28242 OF 2010 PETITIONER/S: N.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, COIRFED, ALAPPUZHA, (KALLARACKAL PUTHEN VEEDU,, S.R.P.MARKET P.O., THAZHAVA, KARUNAGAPPALLY). SRI.K.KARTHIKEYA PANICKER SMT.DAYA K. PANICKER RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DIRECTOR OF COIR DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE OF COIR DEVELOPMENT,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COI MARKETING FEDERATION LTD (COIRFED), REPRESENTED BY ITS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, ALAPPUZHA-688012. 3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKETING, FEDERATION LTD (COIRFED), ALAPPUZHA-688012. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.) SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI SR. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN, SC, COIRFED SRI.JOBY CYRIAC, SC, COIRFED SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, COIRFED
OTHER PRESENT: SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

====================================================== W.P.(C) No. 28242 of 2010 ============================================================= Dated this the 14th day of September, 2022

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

“\a) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the respondents to sanction and disburse gratuity, provident fund and other retiral benefits and one year salary to the petitioner within a time limit prescribed by this Honourable Court with 12% interest with effect from his date of retirement till the realisation of the amount.

b) to declare that the petitioner is eligible and entitled to receive gratuity, provident fund and such other retiral benefits and one year's salary with 12% interest with effect from his date of retirement till the realization of the same and denial of the same or delay in paying the benefits is highly arbitrary, malafide, illegal and unconstitutional.

c) to issue any other writ, order or direction as this Honoruable Court deems fit and proper in the case with cost of the proceedings.” -3-

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not sanctioning and disbursing the gratuity, provident fund and other retirement benefits.

3. When this writ petition came up for consideration,

the counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 submitted that respondents 2 and 3 already filed an ARC before the Assistant Registrar, Coir Project Office, Alappuzha claiming the amount due from the petitioner. The petitioner is a party in that proceedings. If that be so, till the ARC is finally disposed of there cannot be a direction from this Court to disburse the amount. Granting liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again after the disposal of ARC, this writ petition is closed. sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties N.Ramakrishna Pillai vs The Director of Coir Development Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan