IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 4885 of 2009(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.J.MATHEW, S/O.JOHN, KADALIKATTIL HOUSE, KATTAMPACK P.O., NEEZHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.M.P.KRISHNAN NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SECRETARY, THE KAPPUMTHALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.142, KAPPUMTHALA P.O., NEEZHOOR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, VAIKOM. 3. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR, R1 BY ADV. MR.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.4885 of 2009-F = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a debtor under an award passed by an Arbitrator under the KCS Act. Ext.P5 judgment was issued noticing that the relevant circulars issued by the Registrar would apply for finalising the amounts that may be recoverable from the petitioner. It was also held that the relevant circulars would apply even if an award has already been passed. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the sale officer, who is executing the award, to decide as to what is the total amount due. That officer has issued Ext.P7. Petitioner has given Ext.P8 objections to that. It is now for the sale officer to conclude the proceedings and that cannot be made dependent on any decision of the bank as to whether a particular offer is acceptable or not. Even if WP(C)4885/2009 -: 2 :- the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the sale officer during the course of execution, such questions relate to execution, discharge and satisfaction of the award and hence, the petitioner can agitate such issue before the Government in appropriate appeal or revision, as the case may be. On the face of availability of such statutory remedy, I do not find any ground to issue any direction in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner as aforesaid. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/250209