IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 16TH BHADRA 1933 WA.No. 2121 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5262/2008 Dated 20/08/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------- PEETHAMBARAN, S/O.SREEDHARAN, KRISHNA NIVAS, PERUMTHURUTH MURI, PONNAD P.O., AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY RESPONDENT(S): / RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C. CHERTHALA DEPOT. 2. DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C. ALAPPUZHA. 3. KERALA STATE HOUSING FEDERATION KALOOR, ERNAKULAM REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 4. THE THANNEERMUKKAM HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. *ADDL.R5 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM. *(ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16/11/2009 IN THE WRIT APPEAL) ADV. SRI.A.K.CHINNAN FOR R3 SMT.SUSAL A. CHINNAN FOR R3 SRI.B.PRAMOD FOR R4 SHRI P.BENJAMIN PAUL,SC, KSRTC FOR R1-2 MR.GEORGE MECHERIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.NO.2121/2009 APPENDIX RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-I : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 07/06/2005 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER/4TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.A.No.2121 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 7th day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere with recovery proceedings initiated for recovery of arrears of loan taken by the appellant from the 4th respondent. The appellant retired from the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation and based on the agreement executed between the appellant and the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent claimed retirement benefit of the appellant from the KSRTC for settlement of arrears of loan taken by the appellant from the 4th respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the 4th respondent submitted that the appellant after availing house building loan did not even construct the house. According to him, recovery is specifically authorised from the employer by virtue of the agreement executed between the appellant and the 4th respondent. Learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC submitted that the amount is still withheld by the KSRTC. W.A.No.2121/2009 2 Learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the loan is given to the appellant through the 4th respondent and recovery has to be made by the 4th respondent which in turn has to make payment to the 3rd respondent. 3. The learned Single Judge after verifying the documents, particularly Ext.P5 consent letter given by the appellant, held that recovery is authorised by the appellant himself through the consent letter executed and the immunity claimed by him from attachment does not apply. We do not find any ground to interfere with the findings of the learned Single Judge. In our view, the appellant, who availed house building loan and failed to utilise the fund for construction of the house, is not entitled to any relief against recovery from this Court. Consequently, this Writ Appeal is dismissed with a direction to the KSRTC to immediately make payment to the 4th respondent and release balance payment to the appellant. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg