IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 13TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 318 of 2011(L) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- ANATHAKRISHNAN, S/O.SUBRAMANIAM @ MAINA, HOUSE NO-33/256,'NARAYANA'TEMPLE STREET, KARNAKI NAGAR,MOOTHANTHARA, VADAKKANTHARA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY) PALAKKAD 2. KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O.RAMANKUTTY AREKULAM HOUSE, HOUSE NO-47/772 AYAKULATH, KARNAKI NAGAR, KOZHIPARAMBU, VADAKKANATHARA POST,PALAKKAD 3. SHANTA ,W/O.KRISHNANKUTTY AGEKULAM HOUSE HOUSE NO.47/772,ARYAKULATH,KARNAKI NAGAR, KODHIPARAMBU, VADAKKANTHARA POST PALAKKAD, 4. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATTOM, THIRUANANTHAPURAM 5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, MELAMURI, PALAKKAD R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN, SC. R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY R4 & 5 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.318 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The 1st respondent in Ext.P2 order of the Commissioner of Workmen Compensation, Palakkad is the writ petitioner. Through Ext.P2 order passed in WCC.No.309/02, compensation was awarded to the applicants therein to the tune of Rs.3,32,055/-, along with interest. The claim was filed by respondents 2 and 3 herein with respect to the death of their son, who was an employee under the petitioner, by electrocution. It is noticed that the petitioner has not challenged Ext.P2 order by filing any statutory appeal. Therefore the liability could not be disputed in any manner and the recovery steps initiated could not be challenged successfully. 2. However, when the writ petition came up for admission, it was submitted that the petitioner is not intending to challenge the order by invoking any statutory remedy. On the other hand, a request was made to permit payment of the W.P.(C).318/11 -2- amounts within a reasonable time, in instalments. Therefore notice was ordered to respondents 2 and 3 and an interim stay against the recovery steps was granted subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.75,000/- on or before 31.1.2011. 3. It is reported that the petitioner had failed to comply with the condition. Under such circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition any further. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb