IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26600 of 2007(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY LAW OFFICER, SRI. RANJITH JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA, SC, KSRTC. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- SRI.G. SURESAN, S/O. K. GOVINDAN, VATTAVILAKATHU VEEDU, VALIYATHURA, MUTTATHARA VILLAGE, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.ANANDARAJAN.N, SRI.K.K.MANGALANANDAN, SRI.C.V.MILTON, SRI.K.P.JUSTINE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 26600 of 2007(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO.5/2007 DATED 02/01/2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF KSRTC DATED 11/07/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA ON COMPLAINT NO.5/2007 DATED 11/07/2007. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO. 289/2001 DATED 20/11/2002. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5401-5407 OF 2002 DATED 29/08/2002 OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 19040/2007 DATED 09/08/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 26600 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 20th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation is the petitioner herein. They are challenging Ext.P3 order of the Lok Ayukta, whereby the Lok Ayukta has directed the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation to pay retirement benefits due to the respondent out of turn notwithstanding the order of priority fixed by a Division Bench of this Court in the matter of payment of retirement benefits due to retired employees of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. 2. This writ petition was filed based on the situation prevailing in the year 2007. The situation has changed now. The respondent had retired from service as early as on 31.5.2006. Therefore, even going by the priority fixed by this Court, the respondent's turn must have already arisen. In the above circumstances, it is not necessary to consider this writ petition on merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/