2025:KER:30401 WP(C) No.14586 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN TUESDAY, THE 8 TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 14586 OF 2025 PETITIONER: V. P. SREEKALA AGED 58 YEARS D/O. PRABHAKARAN, VADAKKATHUSSERIYIL HOUSE, PERUMBAIKKADU VILLAGE, S.H MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686006 BY ADV BLESSEN GEORGY MATHEWS RESPONDENTS: 1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOTTAYAM, DISTRICT COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION KOTTAYAM, COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686001 2 HOME NURSING SERVICE SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NAGAMPADAM, KOTTAYAM HEAD POST OFFICE P.O., PANAYAKAZHUPP VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686001 BY SMT.SHEEJA C.S, SR.GOVT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:30401 WP(C) No.14586 of 2025 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner was working as Attender in the 2 nd respondent, an establishment covered under the provisions of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (for short, ‘the Act’). She was terminated from service with effect from 01.10.2009. She preferred an appeal under Section 18(2) of the Act challenging termination. The appellate authority, as per Ext.P1, allowed the appeal and ordered reinstatement of the petitioner in service of the 2 nd respondent with full back wages and continuity of service. The appellate authority also ordered that an amount of Rs.3 lakhs has to be paid as compensation to the petitioner in lieu of reinstatement along with other statutory benefits. 2. Against Ext.P1, the 2 nd respondent preferred WP(C) No.4987 of 2015 and this Court, by Ext.P2 judgment, dismissed the writ petition on 15.01.2024. 3. The petitioner states that the direction in Ext.P1 order is not so far complied with. She has therefore preferred Ext.P3 representation before the District Collector to initiate revenue 2025:KER:30401 WP(C) No.14586 of 2025 3 recovery proceedings for the compensation and benefits ordered in Ext.P1. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the 1 st respondent. In the nature of the order I propose to pass, notice to the 2 nd respondent is dispensed with. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though revenue recovery proceedings was initiated by the District Collector, the same was not taken to a logical conclusion. The petitioner also refers to Section 18(6) of the Act which provides for recovery of the amounts due as per Ext.P1 order as arrears of public revenue. Since the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 representation highlighting her grievances, I find it just and proper to direct the 1 st respondent to consider Ext.P3, with notice to the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent, and pass appropriate orders for recovery of the compensation awarded as per Ext.P1 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy 2025:KER:30401 WP(C) No.14586 of 2025 4 of this judgment. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE smp 2025:KER:30401 WP(C) No.14586 of 2025 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14586/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN SA 1/2010 DATED 19/9/2014 PASSED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE KERALA SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 1960 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 4987/2015 DATED 15.01.2024 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/3/2025 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT HAS ISSUED A RECEIPT FOR THE PETITION DATED 17.03.2025