IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2009 / 18TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 15729 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- D.CHENTHAMARAKSHAN,KOCHUPARUTHIPARAMBU, KELAMANGALAM.PO,THAKAZHY,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES' PENSION BOARD,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN:695001. 2. THE ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,HEAD OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA,PIN:688001,REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 3. THE MANAGER,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,AMBALAPPUZHA BRANCH, PIN:688561. ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN FOR R2 BY SC FOR R1 SRI. P.V. MOHANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.15729 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner was a Peon in the Thakazhi Service Co- operative Bank. Availing the benefit of the voluntary retirement scheme, petitioner got retired from service on 1.12.2004. He claimed pension from the first respondent and finally as per Exts.P2 and P3 pension and arrears were sanctioned in terms of the Kerala State Co-operative Societies. Employees Self Finance Pension Scheme, 1994 and the petitioner instructed that the pension be remitted in the account that he maintained in the Ambalapuzha Branch of the 2nd respondent. According to the Bank, they were entitled to appropriate the amount in view of Ext.P9 agreement, that was entered into between the petitioner and the Bank in respect of the liability that petitioner owes to the Bank. His representation for release of the pension WP(c).No.15729/09 2 did not materialize and therefore the writ petition is filed. 2. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the first respondent and also respondents 2 and 3. 3. The main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that under Section 11 of the Pension Act 1871, the pension is exempted from attachment and therefore the Bank has no right to appropriate the amount credited by the first respondent towards his liability. However, having regard to the fact that the amount has since been credited in the petitioner's account maintained by him in the Ambalapuzha Branch of the 2nd respondent, I do not think that the protection of Section 11 of the Pension Act is available to the petitioner. 4. However, the fact remains that if the entire is amount is recovered, that will put the petitioner and his family in penury and this cannot be permitted. 5. Having regard to the peculiar facts, I direct that the Bank shall release to him 50% of the amount which has WP(c).No.15729/09 3 already been credited to the account of the petitioner and the balance 50% alone will be appropriated towards the petitioner's liability to the 2nd respondent Bank. It is also directed that, the 50% of the monthly pension to be credited will also be appropriated by the Bank and the balance will be permitted to be withdrawn by the petitioner. This arrangement will continue until the entire liability is liquidated. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.15729/09 4