IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 1120 of 2008() ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.4456/2008 .................... APPELLANT: /PETITIONER ---------------------- C.G. THANKACHAN, CHARAKKAL CASHEW INDUSTRIES, UMMANNOOR P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.S.ABDUL RAZZAK RESPONDENTS: /RESPONDENTS --------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,KOTTARAKKARA 2. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KOLLAM. 3. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETRY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. Y.KUNJUMON, PALLITHAZHATHIL, O CHERUVALLOOR, ANDOOR P.O., VALAKOM, KOTTARAKKARA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.1120 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated 3rd June, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy,J . An industrial dispute was raised regarding the termination of services of fourth respondent and it was numbered as I.D.No.82/2000 before the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam. Ext.P1 award was passed holding that action of the management in denying employment to the fourth respondent is unjustifiable and also directed the petitioner to pay him arrears of salary, gratuity and compensation as mentioned in the award. The award has become final despite the fact that the petitioner challenged the matter in writ petition and appeal. But, the amount was not paid even after dismissal of writ appeal. Fourth respondent filed claim petition for determination of the amount and by Ext.P4 claim petition under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act was allowed determining an amount of Rs.63,846/= due to the fourth respondent with 9% interest from the date of the order. The above order has become final. It was not challenged, but, the amount was not paid. Therefore, after issuing Ext.P5 show cause notice revenue recovery proceedings were issued to realise the same. Now, petitioner's property is put for sale. Ext.P7 notice challenged here is for selling the land towards sales W.A.1120/2008 2 tax dues as well as dues to the fourth respondent workman. Since sales tax matter is not challenged in the writ petition, we are not granting any stay regarding that aspect in this judgment. As regards the amount of Rs.63,846/-, Government has justified in issuing Ext.P7 notice. However, it is submitted that the appellant is in financial difficulty. But, the employee who was denied employment from 1999 onwards is also not getting any amount. Therefore, if 50% of the amount due to the fourth respondent is paid within three weeks and balance within another three months, sale of property for realising the amount due to the fourth respondent shall be postponed by another four months. We are not staying the sale in respect of realisation of sales tax dues in this case as it is not challenged in this case. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE tks