IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 2829 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.33555/2009 Dated 23/11/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ JOSE PHILIP, S/O.PHILIP, THEKKENATTU HOUSE, KIDANGOOR SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY OFFICE, MEENACHIL TALUK, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KIDANGOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. MERLY KURIAN, KALLUVELIL VEEDU, KIDANGOOR SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. 4. SHERLY KURIAN, KALLUVELIL VEEDU, KIDANGOOR SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. 5. MARY MATHEW, KALLUVELIL VEEDU, KIDANGOOR SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. 6. MINI GEORGE, KANIYAMPARAMBIL VEEDU, MUTHOLLY P.O., KIDANGOOR, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.RAJEEV V.KURUP FOR R3-6 SRI.ALEX.M.SCARIA FOR R3-6 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.2829 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 15th February, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioner is the appellant. He is representing the management, in I.D.No.62/98 and 63/98, before the Labour Court, Ernakulam. Ext.P5 dated 28.2.2006 is the common award passed in the said Industrial Disputes. Since the appellant did not challenge the award or pay the amounts due under the award, revenue recovery proceedings were taken, to recover amounts due. Challenging the revenue recovery notices and also Ext.P5 award passed by the Labour Court, Ernakulam, the Writ Petition was filed on 20.11.2009. The learned Single Judge repelled the challenge against Ext.P5, on the ground of delay and laches. Since the revenue recovery steps were taken to recover the amounts due under the award, the Writ Petition itself was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned Single Judge, this Writ Appeal is preferred. 2. When the matter came up for admission, this Court passed an interim order, directing the appellant to pay Rs.20,000/- each to the respondents 3 to 6. Both sides submit WA NO.2829/09 2 that the said amount has been paid. The learned counsel, who appeared for the appellant, prayed that instalment facility may be provided, to pay the balance amount also. 3. We heard the learned counsel, who appeared for respondents 3 to 6 also, on this point. Having regard to the facts of this case, the appellant is permitted to pay Rs.10,000/- each to respondents 3 to 6, in four equal monthly instalments of Rs.2,500/- each, starting from 15.3.2010. If any default is committed, the revenue recovery proceedings can be revived and proceeded with. If the above amount is paid as directed, it is declared that the appellant need not pay any further amount to the workmen and there shall not be any revenue recovery proceedings for that. The claim of the Government for collection charges is kept open. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.2829 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 15th February, 2010.