IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM W.A. No.78 of 2014 Between:
The Colliery Manager, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, II A Incline, Godavarikhani and others.
… Appellants And Basani Radha and others.
… Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM W.A. No.78 of 2014 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri CKR, J) The only grievance of the appellants is that the learned Judge, while considering the WVMP. No.4406 of 2012 in WPMP. No.37339 of 2012 in W.P. No.29244 of 2012 vide order dated 02.12.2013, permitted the legal heirs of the deceased employee to withdraw half of the decretal amount without furnishing any security.
The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that in the event of appellants succeeding the E.P. No.4 of 2010 that was filed by the deceased employee and also the W.P. No.15276 of 2006 that was filed questioning the orders passed in I.D. No.137 of 2004, appellants would have no way to recover the money from the respondents, legal heirs of the deceased employee, as their other details are not available, though they are prepared and accepted to pay. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that this Court may be interfered with the impugned order by modifying a direction to the respondents to furnish security for the amount directed to be deposited.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the respondents are surviving in the writ petition and writ appeal as the legal heirs of the original employee of late Rajaiah, who was a Badli worker with the appellant Company.
The wife of the workman also died during the pendency of the proceedings. He further submitted that the workman was not allowed to join duty and was made to go around the Company in the name of medical examination. It is also submitted that in the event of the appellants succeeding the proceedings, his clients would repay the money as may be directed by the Court.
Having considered the respective arguments and considering the facts of the case, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the respondents are allowed to withdraw half of the decretal amount i.e. Rs.2,04,000/- by furnishing security for an amount of Rs.1,02,000/-
to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer in E.P. No.4 of 2010. Further, the respondents shall also furnish an undertaking to the effect that they would redeposit the amount that would be withdrawn without furnishing any security i.e. Rs.1,02,000/- within a period of sixty days, in the event of appellants succeeding the litigation.
Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM Date: 22.01.2014 LSK