G. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER challenges Ext.P3 prohibitory order. Petitioner is an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police. The 3rd respondent had subscribed a kuri with the 2nd respondent. The kuri was auctioned and the petitioner and the 4th respondent, the husband of the 3rd respondent were the sureties. Default was committed by the 3rd respondent and thereupon recovery proceedings were initiated. It was in pursuance to the above that Ext.P3 prohibitory order was issued ordering recovery from the salary of the petitioner at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month. It is challenging Ext.P3, the writ petition is filed.

(2.) THE pleadings in the writ petition are to the effect that his basic salary is Rs.9,390/- and his total pay including allowances would be Rs.15,000/- per month and that after effecting deductions towards housing loan, PF loan, subscription to SLI and LIC, his take home pay is only Rs.1,300/-. It is stated that since the situation is as above, if recovery is effected in pursuance to Ext.P3, petitioner will be driven to poverty and it is with this allegation, the writ petition is filed.

(3.) THE writ petition is filed on the basis that his only take home pay is Rs.1,300/- and that therefore if Ext.P3 is implemented, petitioner will not be left with any amount. From the statement referred to above, it is evident that even after making the deductions, his take home pay is Rs.3,397/-. Therefore, if Rs.2,000/- as ordered in Ext.P3 is recovered, petitioner is still left with Rs.1,397/-. That apart, I am also persuaded to think that a defaulter cannot contend that he is entitled to continue payments towards GPF and other voluntary subscriptions and therefore is in penury and should be exonerated from recovery of the dues that he owe to institutions such as the respondent company. That apart, from the statement filed on behalf of the company, it appears that recovery against the 4th respondent, the other surety, is not possible for the reason that he has since been dismissed from service. In such circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ petition.