IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 879 of 2009(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. GURUDASAN PHALGUNA VILASAM, THAZHAM NORTH, CHATHANNOOR. 2. OMANA, W/O.GURUDASAN, DO...DO... BY ADVS. MR.ALEX N.MATHEW (KOLLAM) MR.H.RAMANAN MR.JAMES JOSE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL DIVISION, CHATHANOOR. 3. WORKMEN COMPENSATION COMMISSION KOLLAM. 4. SURESH , PHALGUNA VILASAM, THAZHAM NORTH,CHATHANNOOR. 5. SUJA, DO..DO... BY ADV. MR.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1-2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 879 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 4th June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The son of the petitioners, who was an employee of the first respondent-Electricity Board happened to be electrocuted during the course of his employment on 22.04.2001. The death was sought to be compensated by filing W.C.C.No. 66 of 2002 as borne by Ext. P1, which led to Ext. P2 verdict passed by the third respondent, whereby a total sum of Rs. 2,74,713/- was directed to be paid by the first and second respondents together with statutory interest at the rate of 12% p.a. Even though the respondent-Board deposited the principal amount, no amount towards interest was deposited, as ordered by the third respondent-Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already approached the third respondent by filing Ext. P4 application for appropriate orders for initiating revenue recovery steps against the opposite parties therein, which however, has been kept in cold storage for the reasons best known to the third respondent alone, which in turn W.P.(C) No. 879 OF 2009 2 has been subjected to challenge in the present Writ Petition. 3. Despite completion of service of notice to the concerned respondents including the 'Board', no explanation is forthcoming. 4. In the facts and circumstances, the third respondent is hereby directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P4 application filed by the petitioners for initiating revenue recovery proceedings against the respondents for realisation of the amount due to them under Ext. P2, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioners will produce a copy of the judgment before the third respondent to enable him to pursue further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk