IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2011 / 26TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20222 of 2011(C) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRINCE VARGHESE, S/O.LATE G.VARGHESE, KUMARAKAM HOUSE, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM-2 (CONDUCTOR, KSRTC KOLLAM DEPOT). BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI. MANU GOVIND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, POST OFFICE JUNCTION, VADAKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM 691510. 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KSFE, KSFE BUILDINGS, CHINNAKADA, KOLLAM-1. 3. DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, KOLLAM-2. 4. SMT.RAJESWARI KUNJAMMA, W/O.LATE G.BHARGAVAN PILLAI, REEJA BHAVAN, DECENT JUNCTION, CHENTAPORE, KOLLAM-691557. ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, K.S.F.E., LTD. FOR R1 SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC FOR R3 SRI.M.L. SAJEEV - SC FOR KSFE. SRI.V.V. NAMBIAR - SC SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN - GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 20222 of 2011(C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF LETTER AND RECEIPT FROM SRI. G. BHARGHAVAN PILLAI TO THE MANAGER KSFE, KOLLAM DTD 6.2.2004. EXT.P2: COPY OF LETTER DATED 28.12.2010 FROM R2 TO R3. EXT.P3: COPY OF LETTER DATED 22.6.2011 OF R3. EXT.P4; COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.7.2011 FROM R1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. acd S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 20222 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT The 4th respondent's husband availed a loan from the 1st respondent with the petitioner's father as a surety in the year 1998. The petitioner's father died on 23.12.2001. The petitioner is an employee of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. The 4th respondent's husband retired on 31.1.2005. But, the 3rd respondent did not recover any amount from his terminal benefits. He died on 26.8.2010. Now, respondents 1 and 2 have initiated revenue recovery proceedings against the petitioner, who is not in any way connected with the loan transaction. Respondents 1 to 3 seek to recover the amounts from the salary of the petitioner. That is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. I have heard the parties. Admittedly, the petitioner has no personal liability to pay the amounts for which his deceased father was a surety. That being so, the petitioner cannot be proceeded against personally for the amount due. W.P.(C)No.20222/11 2 Therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner and his personal properties are hereby quashed. However, this will not stand in the way of respondents 1 to 3 proceedings against the 4th respondent. The writ petition is allowed as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.20222/11 3