Disposed

Baby Ouseph Xavier v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Jun 2008RP/656/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a review petition directed at a previous order regarding terminal benefits for a deceased employee. The Court directed the second respondent to sanction and disburse the provident fund dues to the deceased within two months and modified earlier directions on compassionate appointment to require government sanction first.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to sanction and disburse provident fund dues within two months. Modified direction for compassionate appointment to require government sanction first.

Baby Ouseph Xavier Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930

¶5

RP.No. 656 of 2008()

¶6

-------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15151/2008 Dated 10/06/2008

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONERS

¶8

¶9

BABY OUSEPH XAVIER, 49,W/O.LATE XAVIER PULIMOOTTIL PARAMBU, H.NO.XII/1150, PANAYAPILLY, COCHIN

¶10

LIXON @ DIXON, S/O.LATE OUSEPH XAVIER, DO.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY BY SECRETARY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶15

DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶16

SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM.

¶17

BY SC SRI.S. RAMESH BABU

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

V.GIRI, J

¶20

R.P.656/2008 in W.P.(C).15151/2008 -------------------Dated this the 27^th day of June, 2008

¶21

ORDER

¶22

I heard learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.K.S.Madhusoodanan and learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation.

¶23

Mr.Madhudoodhanan points out that in so far as the terminal benefits due under the account of late Ouseph Xavier is concerned, judgment does not make any reference as such to the provident fund amounts. He therefore, prays that a direction may be issued to the second respondent to issue orders sanctioning the provident fund amount due under the account of late Ouseph Xavier. Submission is justified.

¶24

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the second respondent to pass orders as regards the sanctioning and disbursal of the provident fund amount due under the account of late Ouseph Xavier, within a period of two

¶25

R.P.656/2008

¶26

¶27

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

Mr.Madhusoodanan further submits that direction

¶29

to the Corporation to pass orders in the application filed by the petitioners for appointment under the dying-inharness scheme may not be capable of implementation straight away, because the Corporation will have to first obtain orders of sanction from the Government sanctioning the appointment under the dying-in-harness scheme. This submission is also justified.

¶30

In the result, the last direction issued in paragraph 5 of the judgment will be reviewed as follows:-

¶31

“It is further directed that the third respondent shall, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, forward the application filed by the petitioners for compassionate appointment, to the first respondent. First respondent

¶32

R.P.656/2008

¶33

¶34

shall there upon pass orders in the matter of sanctioning the appointment of the claimant under the dying-inharness scheme, relatable to the service of late Ouseph Xavier, within a period of three months thereafter. On receipt of the orders of sanction, Corporation shall issue appropriate orders in the matter of appointment under the dying-in-harness scheme”.

¶35

Review Petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Copy of this judgment shall be tacked along with the copy of the judgment in the writ petition.

¶37

V.GIRI, Judge

¶38

mrcs

Baby Ouseph Xavier v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baby Ouseph Xavier v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.R.Sarala and Others Vs v.R.Padmanabhan

Gracelett T.M. Vs Dr.Rajan Warrier

K.P.Mathew Vs State of Kerala

P.Mohanan Vs State of Kerala

Jayasree Vs I.G. and Others

C.Richard Vs Director of Civil Supplies