Disposed

P.C.Chakochen v. State of Kerala & Others

Kerala HC9 Oct 2009WP(C)/26213/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court directed 4th respondent to compute liability and issue certificate for DCRG finalized within two months. Accountant General instructed to verify HBA closure and revise payment order. Interest claim kept open.

What did the court decide?

4th respondent to compute liability and issue certificate within one month. 2nd respondent to issue certificate and disburse DCRG. AG to revise order if HBA closure found.

P.C.Chakochen Vs State of Kerala & Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 26213 of 2009(V)

¶6

--------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

------------------

¶9

P.C.CHAKOCHEN, (RETD STORE SUPERINTENDENT, MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM) RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL, VELLUTHURUTHI, KUZHIMATTOM P.O., KOTTAYAM 686 533 BY ADV. SMT. P.V.ASHA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

---------------------

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

2. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

3. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

4. SUPERINTENDENT, INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH, GANDHI NAGAR, KOTTAYAM.

¶16

5. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

6. SUB TREASURY OFFICER, SUB TREASURY, KOTTAYAM.

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

kkms/

¶21

V.GIRI, J.

¶22

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = =

¶23

W.P.(C). No. 26213 OF 2009

¶24

= = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = =

¶25

Dated this the 9^th day of October 2009.

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

Petitioner retired from service as Store Superintendent from the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam on 30.06.2007. He is aggrieved by the delay in the disbursal of the DCRG due to him, though the same has been sanctioned under Exts.P1 and P2.

¶28

Learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that liability for the period during which the petitioner had worked at the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam and the Institute of Child Health, Kottayam alone remains to be computed.

¶29

The 4^th respondent as also the Superintendent of the Medical College, Kottayam shall forward a liability statement relating to the petitioner to the 2^nd respondent within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶30

Thereupon the 2^nd respondent shall see that the Liability Certificate / Non Liability Certificate is issued within one month thereafter, intimating the petitioner of any proposal to fix a

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 26213 OF 2009

¶32

¶33

liability. Once a Liability Certificate / Non Liability Certificate is issued, the DCRG shall be disbursed subject to the liability that may be fixed against the petitioner.

¶34

Petitioner has another grievance regarding the authorization granted by the Accountant General under Ext.P2 for an amount of Rs.3,18,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Eighteen Thousand only) by way of DCRG. The DCRG admitted is Rs.3,30,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Thirty Thousand only). The difference seems to be by way of House Building Advance availed by the petitioner. Ext.P3 shows that the said account has been closed and the documents of title have also been directed to be released. This aspect shall be taken note of by the Accountant General and if closure of the House Building Advance is found to be correct, then a revised gratuity payment order shall be issued within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If this be so, then the same shall also be taken into account for the purpose of disbursal of DCRG due to the petitioner. If any liability is found against the petitioner, it is open to him to take appropriate action in relation to the said

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 26213 OF 2009

¶36

¶37

liability. So also the claim for interest made by the petitioner is

¶38

left open.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶40

( V.GIRI ) JUDGE

¶41

kkms/

P.C.Chakochen v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.C.Chakochen v. State of Kerala & Others

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

K.v.Kunhirama Marar Vs the Commissioner

C.M.Latheef Vs Kseb

V.Manikuttan Vs Asst.Devaswom Commissioner

P.K.Shibu Vs State of Kerala and Others

S.Sreekumar Vs Chief Engineer(Hrm)Kseb

Kumari Latha.a Vs State of Kerala