1. Petitioner is a surety to the loan availed of by the fourth respondent from the second respondent. Both of them were employees of the third respondent. For the default committed in remitting the amount by the fourth respondent, the first respondent had passed an award for realizing the amount inter alia from the petitioner. Petitioner's contention is that the fourth respondent was not proceeded against when he was in employment and he was permitted to retire and get disbursed of, his retirement benefits. That, however, will not be a contention, which can be raised by a surety against the recovery proceedings, since his liability is joint and several with that of the borrower.
2. There is also an alternate contention that the recovery should only be in accordance with Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Definitely, the officer, deducting the salary, would ensure that the W.P.(C)No.22886 of 2014 -:2:-
recovery is in accordance with Section 60 CPC.
The writ petition would stand closed, however, reserving the right of the petitioner to proceed against the fourth respondent before the appropriate forum, for recovery of the amount, which he has paid to satisfy the loan liability of the fourth respondent.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
sl.