IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2011 / 10TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 9100 of 2011(J) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ROSHAN KURUVILA,KURUVINAKUNNEL, KURUVAMOOZHY.P.O,ERUMELY,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU JOHN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE AUDIO-VISUAL & REPROGRAPHIC CENTRE,VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE AUDIO-VISUAL & REPROGRAPHIC CENTRE,VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013. ADV. SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9100 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF MEMO OF CHARGE NO.KSAVRC/694/09/P III DTD 12.5.2009 ISSUED BY R2. EXT.P2: COPY OF EXPLANATION DATED 30.5.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P1. EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER NO.KSAVRC/4184/09/EST DATED 13.7.2009 OF R2. EXT.P4: COPY OF EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY R2 DATED 25.6.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.9100 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a former employee of the 1st respondent. When disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, he resigned from service, which was accepted. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that the salary due to the petitioner for the months of May, June, July, August, September, November and December 2001 and January, February, April, May, August, September and October 2002, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December 2005 and January 2006 as also leave surrender salary due to him have not yet been paid. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents does not dispute the liability of the respondents to pay the amounts claimed by the petitioner. Of course, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the amount computed by the petitioner may not be correct. But, it is submitted that the respondents are in dire financial straits and that is why they W.P.(C)No.9100/11 2 could not pay the amounts due to the petitioner. It is submitted that the respondents are now functioning by self generated funds and they are limping slowly back to normal zone and if all of a sudden the amounts are directed to be paid that would seriously prejudice the attempt of the Company to revive itself. The learned Standing Counsel, therefore, seeks six months' time to pay the admitted dues. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner opposes the same. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to see that the amounts actually due to the petitioner are paid, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, if the petitioner has any dispute regarding the quantum so paid, it would be open to the petitioner to take up the matter in an appropriate Forum. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.9100/11 3 W.P.(C)No.9100/11 4