IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 8TH MAY 2009 / 18TH VAISAKHA 1931 WA.No. 999 of 2009() -------------------- {IN WPC.1475/2009 OF THIS COURT} .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT: --------------------------------- KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ---------------------------------- G.PUSHPAKARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT BINDU NIVAS, VETTIYAM, VILAPPIL, PEYAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PEON, RETD ON 30/4/06, CHIEF OFFICE, KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH W.A.NO.1002/09 AND CONNECTED CASES ON 08/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.A.NOs.999, 1002, 1003, 1004,,1005 1006, 1007, 1008 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of May, 2009. JUDGMENT GIRI, J. The appellant in all these cases challenge almost identically worded judgments of the learned single Judge directing out of turn payment of retirement benefits to the respective writ petitioners, taking note of the peculiar facts involved in the particular writ petition, like for instance, the marriage of a daughter or expenses incurred for medical treatment. 2. The Corporation is not aggrieved by the direction to make an out of turn payment in respect of the petitioners and in fact, it is conceded in the writ appeals that the Corporation itself had ascertained the veracity of the purpose pleaded in each of the cases. But the Corporation is aggrieved by the direction issued by the learned Judge, to the following effect: W.A.NO.999 of 2009 & Con.cases. :: 2 :: “However, I make it clear that this payment shall not be out of the ten per cent set apart for paying off the retirement benefits in accordance with the priority of the date of retirement, but shall be out of other funds of the Corporation.” 3. A similar issue was considered by another Bench of this court in W.A.No.182/09. The bench held that since the learned single Judge had found that the writ petitioner is entitled for an out of turn treatment, the disbursal of the said amount should come out of the 10% set apart for the said purpose. It is not necessary that another fund be created for the purpose. 4. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by the Bench in W.A.No.182/09. In the result, all these writ appeals are disposed of modifying the judgment of the learned single Judge by making it clear that the out of turn payment as directed by the learned single Judge shall come out of the corpus constituted by the Corporation by 10% of the daily W.A.NO.999 of 2009 & Con.cases. :: 3 :: collections as already directed by the Bench of this court in W.A.No.289/01. The time for payment of the amount shall stand extended by two weeks from this date. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE Sd/- (C.K.ABDUL REHIM) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge