IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31282 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. SURESH KUMAR N.K., CHETTIYAMTHODY HOUSE, KOLANI P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI. 2. MINI S., W/O.SURESHKUMAR N.K., DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.ROJO J.THURUTHIPARA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE AUDIO VISUAL AND REPROGRAPHIC CENTER, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PUNNAPURAM, WEST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 31282 OF 2009 (E) ===================== Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T By Ext.P1 order dated 20/3/2001, petitioners were appointed as Helpers under the 1st respondent. By Ext.P2 order dated 6/9/2002, they were retrenched. They filed OP No.12440/03 for unpaid wages and during its pendency 1/3rd of the amount was paid. The original petition was finally disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment recording the submission on behalf of the 1st respondent about its financial stringency and that it was anticipating a loan from the State Government. Therefore this Court directed that once the loan is received, the liability of the petitioners will be settled. 2. Petitioners submit that though loan was received, payment of the balance amount due to them has not been made. It is stated that another employee similarly situated like them submitted representation for payment of the balance amount due and obtained Ext.P5 judgment directing its consideration. It is stated that on the strength of Ext.P5, his claim was considered and the full amount has been paid. Despite all this, amount due WPC 31282/09 :2 : to the petitioners have not been paid and complaining of this, the writ petition is filed. 3. The eligibility of the petitioners for payment of the dues claimed by them was not disputed by the 1st respondent when OP No.12440/03 was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment. The only uncertainty was that they were expecting a loan from the State Government. According to the petitioners, that also has been received. If that be so, and particularly having regard to the fact that the petitioner in Ext.P5 has been paid the dues, there is no reason why the amount due to the petitioners should not be paid. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that on the production of a copy of this judgment, the 1st respondent shall consider the claim of the petitioners for the payment of the balance amount due taking into account Exts.P3 and P5 mentioned above. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp