IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34583 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.M.SADANANDAN, RETD. MECHANIC KSRTC, MUNDAPPATTU HOUSE, WORKERS NAGAR, KANIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CHERUPUSHPAM KURIES OLARIKKARA (P) LTD., OLARIKKARA P.O., THRISSUR. BY SC VV NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.34583 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner was a surety for a kuri transaction with the third respondent. That creditor obtained Ext.P2 order of attachment of salary of the petitioner in execution of the decree. The communication given by the Sub Court to the employer KSRTC is dated 9.3.2006 (Ext.P2). The petitioner states that he retired from KSRTC on 31.3.2005 and his pensionary benefits cannot be attached. He therefore says that Ext.P2 attachment of salary after retirement is a superfluous order and that does not have any impact on the entitlement of the petitioner to withdraw the retiral benefits. It is not for this court to now meddle with the matter, particularly when it involves third party rights and claims of a decree holder. It Wpc 34583/2009 2 will definitely be open to the petitioner to move the Sub Court which has issued Ext.P2 and seek clarification in the matter so that the employer KSRTC, a public sector body can act without being clouded by the orders of civil courts. Hence writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the aforesaid. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/8/12