IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24989 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- - THURUTHIPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO. 1789, THURUTHIPURAM P.O., VIA KODUNGALLUR, PIN- 680 667, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD, PB NO.85, KALA NIVAS, TC NO.27/156, 157, CHINMAYA LANE, KUNNUMPURAM, NEAR AYURVEDA COLLEGE, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN 695 001. 2. THE DPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), N.PARUR, ERNAKULAM, PIN 683 513. 3. SMT.SOBHANA, ANDISSERY PARAMBIL HOUSE, POYYA P.O., MALA (VIA), THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 733. R1 BY ADV. SRI. P.V.MOHANAN R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24989 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th August, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P3 proceedings for recovery of the amounts due from the Society to the first respondent by initiating Revenue Recovery proceedings. According to the petitioner, as per Ext.P2 resolution, the third respondent who was the then Secretary had been directed to remit the pension contributions payable to the first respondent. However, she did not comply with the said direction. Consequently, the first respondent has now demanded the amount together with interest thereon at the rate of 24% per annum. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner - Society has now been made liable for payment of interest, which liability has arisen solely due to the inaction on the part of the third respondent. 2. In view of the substantial financial loss that has been caused to the petitioner, arbitration proceedings have already been initiated against the third respondent wpc No.24989/2010 2 for recovery of the loss caused to the Society. The said proceedings are pending. According to the counsel for the petitioner, initiation of Revenue Recovery proceedings for recovery of the said amount at this stage is absolutely without any justification. Therefore, he prays for keeping in abeyance the proceedings for recovery evidenced herein by Ext.P3. 3. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the amount that is demanded in Ext.P3 is to be paid by the third respondent and therefore some respite should be granted to the petitioner until the arbitration proceedings are finally disposed of. 4. Adv.P.V.Mohanan takes notice for the first respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that arbitration proceedings have already been initiated against the third respondent for recovering the amount of loss caused to the Society by her action. However, the proceedings are still pending and therefore, it is submitted that there is no justification for issuing Ext.P3 at this stage. Nevertheless, it is to be noted that the liability to pay the contributions is on the petitioner. It was for the petitioner to have ensured wpc No.24989/2010 3 that the contributions were paid on time. If the default has been committed by the third respondent, the loss resulting from such default could certainly be recovered by the petitioner. Since the said question is pending consideration in arbitration proceedings, I do not venture to make any observation regarding the entitlement of the petitioner to such relief. However, the petitioner cannot escape from the liability to pay the contributions payable to the first respondent in anticipation of favourable orders in the arbitration proceedings. After making the payments due to the first respondent, the petitioner can certainly prosecute the arbitration proceedings for recovery of the loss caused. In view of the above, there are no grounds to keep in abeyance the proceedings based on Ext.P3 notice. The counsel for the petitioner however, seeks some time to pay the amount demanded in Ext.P3. The counsel for the petitioner offers to pay an amount of Rs.1 lakh within ten days from today and seeks time for payment of the balance amount. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the petitioner can be granted the said facility. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is wpc No.24989/2010 4 disposed of directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.1 lakh towards the amount demanded in Ext.P3 within a period of ten days from today and to pay the balance amount demanded in Ext.P3 within a period of six weeks thereafter. Further proceedings based on or pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance till then. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not make the payment of Rs.1 lakh within ten days as stipulated above, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 can be initiated. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/