Disposed

K.a.Adamkhan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Dec 2008WP(C)/23899/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired Divisional Accountant petitioned for terminal benefits after service retirement, citing delayed disbursement due to prior suspension and punishment involving recovery of increments and pecuniary loss. The Court directed partial disbursement with provisional withholding of disputed amounts.

What did the court decide?

Ordered disbursement of terminal benefits within one month, provisionally withholding Rs. 1,60,000 and monetary value of three increments as per Govt order dated 28.5.2007.

K.a.Adamkhan 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 P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶4

WP(C).No. 23899 of 2008(T) --------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER(S):

¶6

¶7

K.A.ADAMKHAN, DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTANT (RETD) IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, MALAMPUZHA RESIDING AT KIZHAKOOTU HOUSE, KONGAD P.O- 678 631 PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.S.SHARAN

RESPONDENT(S):

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT., SECRETARIAT, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

THE CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION & ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DIVISION, MALAMPUZHA.

¶14

DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL, MALAMPUZHA REP. BY CHAIRMAN.

¶15

ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, VIGILANCE & ANTICORRUPTION BUREAU, PALAKKAD.

¶16

CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, PROJECT ZONE, KOZHIKODE.

¶17

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶20

W.P.(C) No.23899 of 2008

¶21

Dated this the 11^th December, 2008.

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

Heard Sri.P.Santhalingam, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman,

¶24

the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶25

The petitioner retired from service on 31.5.2007

¶26

while he was working as Divisional Accountant in the Irrigation Department on attaining the age of superannuation. His grievance is that till date, the terminal benefits have not been disbursed.

¶27

The second respondent has filed a statement dated 25.10.2008 stating that the petitioner was placed under suspension by Government Order dated 27.4.2007 and that the disciplinary action was finalised as per Government Order dated 28.5.2007, whereby the Government imposed on the petitioner the punishment of barring of three increments without cumulative

¶28

W.P.(C) No.23899/2008

¶29

¶30

effect and also ordered recovery of the monetary value of the three increments from his pensionary benefits. It is also stated that in addition to the said punishment, the Government have also ordered recovery of the sum of Rs.1,60,000/= towards reimbursement of the pecuniary loss caused to the Government.

¶31

The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that reserving liberty with the petitioner to challenge the Government order dated 28.5.2007, the punishment imposed thereunder and the recovery ordered, this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to disburse the terminal benefits sanctioned to the petitioner after provisionally withholding the sum of Rs.1,60,000/= and the monetary value of three increments. The learned Government Pleader does not seriously oppose the said request.

¶32

In these circumstances, having regard to the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel on either side and the fact that the Government does not have any other

¶33

W.P.(C) No.23899/2008

¶34

¶35

claim against the petitioner, I dispose of the Writ Petition with the following directions.

¶36

The competent authority among the respondents shall, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, disburse the terminal benefits that the petitioner is entitled to, after provisionally withholding a sum of Rs.1,60,000/= and the monetary value of three increments in terms of the Government Order dated 28.5.2007. It will be open

¶37

to the petitioner to challenge the Government order dated 28.5.2007 and the decision taken by the Government to withhold his increments and also to recover the sum of Rs.1,60,000/= from his pensionary benefits in other appropriate proceedings. The contentions of the petitioner on the merits are left open.

¶38

P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE

¶39

nj.

K.a.Adamkhan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.a.Adamkhan 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

A.H.Phiroskhan Vs State of Kerala

A.Kunhikari Vs State of Kerala and Others

Jini.K.Varghese Vs State of Kerala & Ors.

G.Vijayakumar and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

M.K.Jaffar and Others Vs State of Kerala and Another

Sankaran Namboothiri N.S. Vs Travancore Devaswom Board