High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition allowed; directions issued for re...

K.J. Joy Karikkadu v. Nedumudy Village Service Co-Operative Society Ltd and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Devan Ramachandran
Judgment Date
2022-06-24
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is allowed. The competent Authority of the 5th respondent is directed to initiate revenue recovery actions to recover the amounts reflected in Exts. P5 and P7, with interest, within one month from receipt of a copy of this judgment. Upon such requisition, the 6th respondent (District Collector) or any other competent Authority shall initiate and complete recovery under the Revenue Recovery Act within six months. After funds are recovered and remitted to the 5th respondent’s account, they shall immediately pay the eligible pension and arrears to the petitioner.
Final Disposition
Writ petition allowed; directions issued for revenue recovery and pension payment

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • K.J. Joy Karikkadu

Respondents

  • Nedumudy Village Service Co-Operative Society Ltd. No.2331 represented by its Secretary, Nedumudy P.O, Alappuzha District-688508
  • Board of Directors of the Nedumudy Village Service Co-Operative Society Ltd No.2331 represented by its President, Nedumudy P.O, Alappuzha District-688508
  • Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Kuttanad, Alappuzha District
  • Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Alappuzha, Alappuzha District
  • Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board, represented by its Secretary, P.B. No.85, Chinmaya Lane, Kunnumpuram, Thiruvananthapuram-695001
  • Addl. R6. District Collector, 1st Floor, Collectorate, Alappuzha, Kerala – 688001

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • T.R. Harikumar
  • • Sri Arjun Raghavan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri M. Sasindran
  • • Sri Joshy Thannickamattom (GP)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, a retired employee, approached the Kerala High Court seeking payment of his pension which had not been disbursed since his retirement in 2006. The 5th respondent, Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board (Pension Board), contends it cannot pay until the Nedumudy Village Service Co-Operative Society Ltd. (the 1st respondent) remits its contributions, including arrears and interest, which have been quantified and demanded (Exts. P5 and P7). The petitioner argues that Clause 38 of the Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Fund Scheme, 1994, read with Clause 38A, authorizes recovery of the dues through the Revenue Recovery Act so that pension can commence from the date contributions are paid or recovered. The 5th respondent cites Sambasivan Nair.T.R v. Kerala State Cooperative Employees Pension Board (2012) 3 KHC 518, indicating recovery can be directed against the Society’s office-bearers, subject to cooperation by the competent Recovery Authority. Government Pleader notes the Society has no assets, but accepts that necessary steps can be taken if requisition is made. The Court observes that the Society has not contested the quantification and has not appeared, and has thus directed that revenue recovery be initiated within one month for Exts. P5 and P7, with completion within six months after requisition to the District Collector or other competent authority, and upon recovery, pension with arrears shall be paid to the petitioner.

Provisions of Law Cited

Clause 38 of the Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Fund Scheme, 1994Clause 38A of the Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Fund Scheme, 1994 (Pension Scheme)Revenue Recovery Act

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner was pension-eligible but has remained unpaid due to the Society’s failure to remit contributions. The Pension Board is duty-bound to recover dues under Clause 38 and 38A of the Pension Scheme via Revenue Recovery so that pension and arrears become payable to the petitioner. The Court should direct immediate action for recovery and ensure pension disbursal upon realisation of the dues, given the Society’s non-compliance and lack of other assets.

Contentions of Respondents

The Pension Board argues that recoveries are permissible under Clause 38, with Sambasivan Nair.T.R v. Kerala State Cooperative Employees Pension Board cited to show recovery can be directed against the Society’s President and Secretary. If necessary, Recovery Authority cooperation is expected. The District Collector notes the Society’s lack of assets; however, if requisitioned, steps for recovery can proceed. The Government Pleader asserts that necessary steps can be taken upon requisition by the Board.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sambasivan Nair.T.R v. Kerala State Cooperative Employees Pension Board and another2012(3) KHC 518PositiveCited as authority for recovering contributions from the Society’s office-bearers under Clause 38 of the Pension Scheme; supports the outcome directing recovery actions.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against K.J. Joy Karikkadu v. Nedumudy Village Service Co-Operative Society Ltd and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944** ## **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** ## **PETITIONER:** K.J.JOY KARIKKADU HOUSE, NADUBHAGAM, CHAMPAKULAM.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688505. BY ADVS. T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN ## **RESPONDENTS:** 1 THE NEDUMUDY VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.2331 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NEDUMUDY.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688508 2 THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NEDUMUDY VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.2331, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, NEDUMUDY.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688508 3 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCEITIES (GENERAL), KUTTANADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688508 4 THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688101 5 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.B. NO.85, CHINMAYA LANE, KUNNUMPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 6 Addl.R6. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, 1ST FLOOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA – 688 001. (IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.6 AS PER ORDER DATED 24.06.2022 IN WP(C) NO.12540/2020) BY ADV SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.JOSHY THANNICKKAMATTAM-GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **2** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner retired, on attaining the age of superannuation,from the services of the 1[st] respondent – Society in the year 2006. His allegation is that he has not been paid his eligible pension until today and seeks that it be directed to be done without any further delay. 2. Sri.T.R.Harikumar – learned counsel for the petitioner, explained that, though his client is eligible to be paid his pension, the 5[th] respondent – Pension Board has been incapacitated because the Society has not yet remitted their contribution, along with arrears and interest, though it has been quantified by them and a demand issued, as is evident from Exts.P5 and P7. **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **3** He contented that, therefore, since the Society is refusing to remit their dues, it is obligated upon the 5[th] respondent – Pension Board, under the provisions of Clause 38 of the Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Fund Scheme, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “Pension Scheme” for short), to recover it invoking the Revenue Recovery Act, so that his client can begin obtaining the pension, particularly because, under Clause 38A of the 'Pension Scheme', such payment can start only from the date on which the contribution is paid/recovered, as the case may be. 3. Sri.M.Sasindran – learned Standing Counsel for the 5[th] 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 Cooperative 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. 4. Sri.Joshy Thanikkamattom – the learned Government Pleader, submitted that, if and when any requisition is made by the 5[th] respondent - Board for recovery against the 1[st] respondent, necessary steps can be taken; but that, to the available information with the 6[th] respondent – **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **5** District Collector, the Society does not have any assets or resources to honour the demand made on them through Exts.P5 and P7. 5. When I consider the afore submissions, it is evident that, statutorily, the Board is obliged to make their requisition for revenue recovery if the Society fails to accede to their, demand or does not successfully challenge it appropriately. 6 .In the case at hand, the Society has not challenged the demands reflected in Exts.P5 and P7; and in fact, they have not even thought it necessary to appear before this Court when this matter has been heard today, thus making it inferentially clear that they have no objection to the quantification, but is still refusing to make payment. **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **6** In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and direct the competent Authority of the 5[th] respondent to initiate revenue recovery action for recovering the amounts reflected in Exts.P5 and P7, along with applicable interest - by making appropriate requisition to the 6[th] respondent – District Collector or such other competent Authority under him which shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such requisition being received by the 6th respondent or by any other competent Authority under him, all action for recovery, as per the Revenue Recovery Act, shall be initiated and completed against the 1[st] respondent at the earliest, but not later than six months thereafter. Needless to say, on the amounts being **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **7** recovered and remitted to the account of the 5[th] respondent, they will forthwith pay the eligible pension and its arrears to the petitioner thereafter. Sd/- ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **JUDGE** SAS **WP(C) NO. 12540 OF 2020** **8** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12540/2020** PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS - EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.03.2014 IN WP(C) NO.982/2008 - EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.05.2016 IN WP(C) NO.26322/2015 - EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY DATED 23.09.2019 IN CON.CASE (CIVIL) NO.1280/2017 - EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN WA NO.272 AND 273 OF 2017 DATED 04.06.2019 - EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 31.12.2019 ALONG WITH A STATEMENT SHOWING THE CALCULATION OF CONTRIBUTION ISSUED B T HE 5TH RESPONDENT - EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ENVELOPE WITH ENDORSEMENT, CONTAINING EXT.P5 NOTICE SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE SOCIETY - EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.PB/P1/237/ALP DATED 14.05.2020 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT