IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20987 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE THIRUVALLA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.477, H.O.OF THE THIRUVALLA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.477, THIRUVALLA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY A.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.A.P.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, ENNAPPATTU HOUSE, KALLOOPPARA P.O., MALLAPPALLY, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATION EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 1 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. VERIFICATION OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.P.V.MOHANAN,SC,K.ST.CO.OP.EMP.PENSI FOR R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C. SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.20987 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P9, issued by the 2nd respondent demanding additional remittance from the petitioner Bank. 2. Petitioner bank was covered by its own provident fund scheme and came under the coverage of the 2nd respondent, with effect from 4.4.2000. It is stated that by Ext.P1, the employer's share along with the interest thereon, was transferred to the 2nd respondent, which was duly accepted by them. 3. It is stated that, subsequently, two employees viz. Smt. C. Amminikutty, Branch Manager and one Sri. T.R. Soman Pillai, Attender (Higher Grade) retired from the service of the petitioner Bank, with effect from 31.3.2008 WP(c).No.20987/09 2 and 31.5.2008 respectively. Thereupon Exts.P2 and P3 demand notices were issued calling upon the petitioner to remit Rs.1,22,454/- and Rs.81,109/- respectively together with interest at the rate of 24% with effect from 1.7.2008. That was objected by the petitioner by filing Ext.P4 and thereafter they filed WP(c).No.25013/08 before this court, challenging levy of 24% interest. 4. During the pendency of the writ petition, by Ext.P12(a) Government Order dated 5.2.2009, Government introduced a one time settlement scheme, enabling societies, which were in default from 1.2.1999 to clear the arrears paying interest at the rate of 12%, as against 24% prescribed in the pension scheme. Implementing Ext.P12(a), Exts.P10, P10(a) circulars were also issued requiring the Societies to avail the benefit of one time settlement scheme. Subsequently, when WP(c). No.25013/08 came up for hearing before this court along with other similar writ petitions, by Ext.P5 judgment rendered on 4.6.2009, this court disposed of the writ petition directing WP(c).No.20987/09 3 that it will be open to the petitioner to avail the benefit of the one time settlement scheme announced by Ext.P12(a). 5. It is stated that in pursuance to the directions in the judgment, liability of the petitioner was revised, applying 12% interest and Exts.P6 and P7 statements were issued. Accordingly, as per Ext.P8(c) receipt petitioner remitted Rs.37,405/- and Rs.52,191/- being the arrears payable towards the contribution due in respect of Smt. Amminikutty and Sri. Soman Pillai respectively. Later on, Ext.P9 was issued informing the petitioner that the liability as quantified in Ext.P6 and P7 and discharged as per Ext.P8(c) was not correct and therefore the petitioner should remit a further sum of Rs.60,444/- towards the liability due to Smt. Amminikutty and Rs.57,885/- towards the liability due to Sri. Soman Pillai. It is in these circumstances the writ Petition is filed with the aforesaid prayers. 6. The contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that, additional amounts demanded as per Ext.P9 and its WP(c).No.20987/09 4 quantification as reflected in the statements issued is contrary to the directions contained in Ext.P12(a) government order, announcing the One Time Settlement facility. According to the learned counsel, in terms of Ext.P12(a), arrears due from society from 1.2.1999, can be discharged together with 12% interest there on. It is stated that on the other hand, the Board has levied interest at the rate of 24% in respect of Smt. Amminikutty till 18.11.2005 and in respect of Sri. Soman Pillai till 15.9.2005 and 12% thereafter. It is stated that the quantification so done by the Board is erroneous. 7. On the other hand, in the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent they have justified the quantification done in Ext.P9. According to the respondents, as per Ext.P12(a) one time settlement scheme, they are entitled to levy interest at 24% till the date on which arrears have fallen due and for the period thereafter alone, a defaulter is eligible for the concessional rate of 12%. It is stated that it is on that basis, petitioner's liability has been correctly quantified and payment WP(c).No.20987/09 5 demanded as per Ext.P9 referred to above. 8. I have considered the submissions made by both sides. 9. Ext.P12(a) Government Order introducing one time settlement scheme provides that amount in default from 1.2.1999 can be paid by defaulting societies together with interest at 12% and on that basis, such societies can settle its liability. What is to be noticed from clause(2) of Ext.P12(a) is that the facility to pay 12% concessional rate of interest is available only on arrears that is due from a society from 1.2.1999. In this case, the calculation statement attached to Exts.P2 and P3 shows that in respect of Smt. Amminikutty amount was remaining outstanding and partial remittances were made by the petitioner society on 4.4.2000, 16.12.2004 and on 18.11.2005. From 3rd March, 2000 onwards contribution has been remitted without default. Similarly in respect of Sri. Soman Pillai, statement shows that, amounts were remitted in partial discharge of the outstanding liability on 4.4.2000, 16.12.2004 and on 15.9.2005. In his case also, WP(c).No.20987/09 6 from March, 2000 onwards, contribution has been remitted by the petitioner without default. 10. A perusal of the statements shows that, arrears due from the petitioner in respect of Smt. Amminikutty has been quantified as on 18.11.2005, the date of last payment, giving credit to the partial payments made till then. Similarly in the case of Soman Pillai, such quantification has been done as on 15.9.2005 when the last payment was made. Statement also shows that for the period up to 18.11.2005 and 15.9.2005, 24% interest has been levied and thereafter 12% has been levied as provided in Ext.P12(a). It is to be reiterated that in terms of clause 2 of Ext.P12(a) the benefit available to the society is to clear the arrears for the period subsequent to 1.2.1999 and pay the arrears with interest at 12% thereon. In these cases arrears have been quantified, after giving credit to the partial payments made in the case of Amminikutty as on 18.11.2005 and in the case of Sri. Soman Pillai as on 15.9.2005, when the last partial payments were made. Once WP(c).No.20987/09 7 arrears were quantified in this manner, interest at 12% has been levied for the period thereafter. In my view, this calculation adopted by the respondent cannot be faulted and it is fully in compliance with clause(2) of Ext.P12(a). If that be so, the demand made by the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P9 also cannot be faulted and the petitioner should pay the dues. 11. However, having regard to the fact that the writ petition was pending in this court, it is directed that if the amount due under Ext.P9 is paid within 4 weeks from today, that will be accepted by the 2nd respondent as in discharge of the liability under Ext.P9. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.20987/09 8