The court ruled that the Managing Director alone cannot be held liable for payment orders when a separate legal entity is responsible.

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.

The present Review Petition has been filed under Order XLVII Rule I read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging non-compliance of the interim order dated 10.10.2025 passed in Contempt Case No.2048/2025, whereby the personal presence of the Managing Director was exempted for the time being with a direction to him to file an affidavit clearly stating as to what steps have been taken to make the payment of the remaining amount along with documentary proof.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that while passing the impugned interim order, the Managing Director had been advised to file the affidavit instead of Committee of Trustees who are liable to make the payment of pension. As per Clause 3(3) of Annexure-1 Pension Regulation, the administration of Pension Fund is by a committee of trustees, namely Kerala State Warehousing Corporation employees Pension and other Retirement Benefits Fund Trust, which is a separate legal entity, made as 2^nd respondent in the above writ petition as well as writ appeal. But the pension Fund Trust is not made a party in the above contempt court case. In paragraph 2 of the order sought to be reviewed, this Hon'ble Court has observed that the learned Single Judge has directed the Corporation to disburse the pensionary benefits to the respondent herein and calculate it on the basis of the last pay drawn by order 14.11.2017. In fact, there is no direction to the Managing Director to disburse the Pensionary benefits, but, to the respondents and therefore, the authority, ie, the Trust who is a separate legal entity is liable to make the payment of pension who has not been added as respondent in the Contempt Petition. Therefore, apparent error has crept in the interim order passed by this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and submitted that there is no apparent error in the present Review Petition since only the interim order has been challenged in the Review Petition. Therfore, there needs no interference in the order passed by this Court.

4. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides.

5. On perusal of the causetitle in the Writ Petition No.4625/2020 and WA No.191/2021, it is seen that Kerala State Ware Housing Corporation Employees Pension and other Retirement Benefit Fund Trust is a party respondent. The directions issued by the learned Single judge is to the respondents in the Writ Petition where the Trust is also one of the respondents. It is the joint responsibility of the respondents to implement the order in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid, we find that only the Managing Director cannot be made liable for violation of the orders. Therefore, in these circumstances, we have no hesitation in recalling the order dated 10.10.2025. Accordingly, we do so. Order dated 10.10.2025 is set aside. The Contempt Petition may be listed for further orders on 09.01.2026.

This Review Petition is allowed.