IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2008 / 30TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 32209 of 2005(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ THOMAS JOSEPH, U.P.S.A., S.J.U.P.S., PERINGUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KOTTAYAM. 2. THE HEADMASTER, S.J.U.P.S., PERINGUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. JOMA THANKACHAN, W/O.THANKACHAN SKARIA, MULLOORATH HOUSE, PRAKASH P.O., UDAYAGIRI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THANKACHAN SCARIA, U.P.S.A., ST.MARY'S U.P.SCHOOL, UDAYAGIRI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. THE HEAD MASTER, ST.MARY'S U.P.SCHOOL, UDAYAGIRI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, K.S.F.E. LTD. FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 18904 OF 2003 DATED 17.6.2003 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RR NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED7.7.2005 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE BUILDING TAX ASSESSMENT REGISTER OF THE VATHIKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYAT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: ;NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 32209 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears due from the third respondent, for whom petitioner along with husband of the third respondent, who is the fourth respondent herein, stood as sureties. Petitioner filed another Writ Petition, W.P.C. 18904 of 2003 and this Court vide judgment dated 17.6.2003 directed the KSFE to proceed for recovery against the defaulter, her husband and against other sureties. The present W.P. is also substantially for the very same direction and therefore the same is not maintainable. W.P. is therefore dismissed as devoid of any merit. If respondents have not complied with Ext.P1 judgment, it is for the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings in the matter. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 2