IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28879 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- N.K.KRISHNAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.LATE KORAN, NELLIPARAMBA HOUSE, PARUTHIPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI. R.T.PRADEEP SRI. SREEKANTH S.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, MARKETING DEPARTMENT, 3RD FLOOR, YOGAKSHEMA BUILDING, WEST WING, J.B.MARG, MUMBAI, PIN 400 021. 2. CHAIRMAN, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE, MARKETING DEPARTMENT, 3RD FLOOR, YOGASHEMA BUILDING, WEST WING, J.B.MARG, MUMBAI, PIN 400 021. 3. ZONAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN ZONAL OFFICE, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, P.B.NO.2450,153, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-600 002. 4. SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MYTHREE ARCADE, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, THRISSUR-4. 5. BRANCH MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, BRANCH OFFICE, YESSAR PLAZA, COURT ROAD, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD - 678 541. BY ADV. S.EASWARAN, SC, LIC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PN WP(C).No. 28879 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.- P1 - COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 2.1.2009 BY WHICH CHANDRAN WITHDRAWN THE COMPLAINT. EXT.- P2 - COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.8.2008 BY WHICH RAZIYA WITHDRAWN THE COMPLAINT. EXT.- P3 - COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22.4.2008. EXT.- P4 - COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 14.5.2009. EXT.- P5 - COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 25.5.2009. EXT.- P6 - COPY OF ORDER DATED 12.6.2009 BY FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.- P7 - COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 20.6.2009 BEFORE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.- P8 - COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.3.2010 BY WHICH EXHIBIT-P7 APPEAL WAS REJECTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.- P9 - COPY OF THE MEMORIAL DATED 10.6.2010 BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.- P10 - COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2010 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.- P11 - COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 11.2.2011 WHICH IS FURNISHED BY CORPORATION. EXT.- P12 - COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8.10.2010 IN W.P.(C) NO.30603/2010. EXT.- P13 - COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.8.2011 BEFORE FIFTH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE PN ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 28879 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was an agent of Life Insurance Corporation of India, governed by the conditions of service of agents as provided under Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972. On various allegations he was issued with Ext.P4 show cause notice which states as follows. “And whereas, I, in exercise of powers vested in me under Life Insurance Corporation of India(Agents) Rules, 1972, hereby provisionally propose to impose a penalty of “Termination of agency of Sri.N.K. Krishnan and forfeit the renewal commission” under Rules 8(4), 16(1) (a), 16(1)(b) read with Rule 19(1) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India W.P.(C) No. 28879 OF 2011 :2 : (Agents) Rules, 1972, for the above said misconduct. Now therefore, Sri.N.K.Krishnan, Agent, Ag.Code No.3647773, Alathur Branch Office under Ernakulam Division is hereby to Show Cause within 15 days of receipt of this Show Cause Notice as to why the above said penalty be not imposed on him. If no reply is received within the aforesaid period or reply received is not found satisfactory, further action shall be taken without any reference to him.” 2. Petitioner submitted Ext.P5 reply admitting the guilt. Accordingly Ext.P6 order was issued, imposing a penalty of termination of agency and forfeiture of renewal of commission as proposed in Ext.P4. Petitioner filed Ext.P7 appeal which was rejected by Ext.P8 order. A memorial filed by the petitioner was also rejected by Ext.P10 order of the Chairman. It is in these W.P.(C) No. 28879 OF 2011 :3 : circumstances this writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is innocent of the allegations and according to him, the allegations in Ext.P4 did not disclose a case of mis-conduct. First of all, the said contention was not raised by the petitioner in Ext.P5 reply and on the other hand he had admitted the guilt. Therefore this contention is not now open to be raised, much less in a writ petition. 4. Counsel for the petitioner then contend that Rule 19 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India(Agents) Rules governing forfeiture of the renewal commission is applicable only in cases where fraud is made out and that the allegations in Ext.P4 did not disclose a case of fraud committed by the petitioner. However a close reading of Ext.P4 shows that the petitioner had not only misappropriated amounts that are due to the subscribes of the insurance company, but also had made investments of W.P.(C) No. 28879 OF 2011 :4 : the said amounts in the names of strangers, contrary to the instructions of the beneficiaries of the policies to whom amounts were due. This conduct of the petitioner who enjoyed the confidence of the subscribers certainly discloses a case of fraud which attracted Rule 19 of the above said Rules. That apart, this is a contention which was also not raised by the petitioner either before the first authority or before the appellate authority or before any higher authority, as the case may be. Therefore I do not find any merit in this writ petition and hence it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-