IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2010 / 5TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 8131 of 2010(N) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- POULOSE.K.C,AGED 68 YEARS, S/O.CHACKO,RESIDENT OF KIDENGEN HOUSE,MALAYATTOOR. P.O,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KERALA STATE. BY PARTY- IN PERSON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,TRANSPORT BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC,ANGAMALY,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KERALA STATE. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 8131 of 2010-N - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT In this writ petition, the petitioner who is a retired driver of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, is seeking mainly a direction to the Corporation to pay the full pension and terminal benefits in accordance with the rules. 2. The petitioner was appointed by the Public Service Commission as a driver on 23.11.1972. The details of his claims under different heads have been shown in para 20 of the writ petition. The total amount claimed by him is Rs.20,60,045/-on different counts plus Rs.5 lakhs as pension and interest. 3. When the matter came up for admission, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation was directed to file a statement and accordingly a statement has been filed. It is mainly pointed out that the Corporation has already paid the entire amounts to the petitioner. It is also contended that the claims, if any, of the petitioner have been considered by this Court in Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) judgments in W.P.(C) No.6896/2009 and W.A. No.1832/2009 and adverse comments have been made on the pleas WPC 8131/2010 2 raised by the petitioner also. He has received an amount of Rs.1,64,528/- even during different periods before May, 2003 except an amount of Rs.3,445/- received on 5.8.2006. Reference is also made to another writ petition filed by the petitioner, viz. W.P.(C) No.6386/2004 claiming more than Rs.10 lakhs as retiral benefits, which was dismissed on 30.1.2006 and which was confirmed in W.A. No.387/2006 also. It is further pointed out that for identical reliefs claimed in this writ petition, O.S. No.246/2009 has been filed by him in the Sub Court, N. Parur. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation made available a copy of the plaint in O.S. No.246/2009 filed by the petitioner. There, in para 6 the total amount due to the petitioner is shown as Rs.20,60,045/-, the very same amount described in para 20 of the writ petition. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation that the matter is posted for framing issues before the Sub Court, now. 5. In the light of the fact that the petitioner has already availed of the alternate remedy by filing a suit and the very same claims have been raised in the writ petition also, the objection taken by the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation that the writ petition is not maintainable, is liable to be sustained. 6. The petitioner argued in person and submitted that the WPC 8131/2010 3 Corporation is bound to pay the amounts claimed. It is submitted that he was denied various benefits at different periods of his service. 7. It is up to the petitioner to agitate the matter before the Sub Court, Parur in the ending suit. The petitioner cannot, after the filing of the suit, file a writ petition for the same and identical reliefs. If the petitioner wants to expedite the proceedings in the suit, he can approach the Sub Court itself in that regard. It is made clear that I have not expressed anything on the merits of the claims or the plea of the Corporation on them. Leaving open the remedy of the petitioner to prosecute the reliefs in O.S. No.246/2009 pending before the Sub Court, N. Parur, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/