IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 4707 of 2006(I) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: C.R. JAYAKUMAR, S/O. CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, AGED 40 YEARS, POSTMAN, ANCHAL POST OFFICE, PROMOTED AND WORKING AS `MAIL OVERSEER', PUNALOOR POSTAL SUB DIVISION, PUNALUR-691 305. BY ADV. SRI.T.S.JOHN SRI.M.S.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, CHALAI BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE HEAD POSTMASTER, PUNALUR, PUNALUR-691 305. 4. GOPINATHAN NAIR, RETIRED GAZETTED - STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, RESIDING AT THEVATHOTTAM, KULATHARA, KALADY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. CHANDRAN, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, EMPLOYEE AT MALAPPATTOM BRANCH, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.JOHN, ADDL.SC., FOR R1 & R2 SRI.M.SREEKUMAR FOR R4 SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SG FOR R3 SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN,SC,K.S.F.E. LTD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.4707 of 2006 I ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “i. issue a writ of mandamus certiorari calling for the records and quash the order issued by respondents 1 and 2 to recover Rs.1500/- from the salary of the petitioner per month; ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, restrain respondents 1 to 3 from recovering Rs.1500/- from the salary of the petitioner; iii. To issue a writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to recover the loan amount taken by the 4th respondent from respondents 4 and 5; iv. to such other orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 17.2.2006, an interim order was passed on the following terms: “S.C.Sri.A.K.John takes notice for R1 and 2. Addl.C.G.S.C. takes notice for R3. Issue urgent notice to R4. Notice to R5 is unnecessary for the time being. WPC 4707/06 2 In view of the remittance already made by the petitioner, there will be stay as prayed for, for a period of one month. There will be interim direction to the 2nd respondent to proceed for recovery of the balance arrears from the 4th respondent, if he is the defaulter, immediately and file a report in this Court within three weeks. Petitioner will produce a copy of this order before the 2nd respondent for proceeding for recovery as directed above and for filing a report.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the interim order, the matter has already become infructuous and that it may be closed accordingly since the entire amount has already been satisfied. In such circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. (P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge) tkv