Allowed

N.Lakshmikutty v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Oct 2011WP(C)/16773/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired Special Tahsildar filed a writ petition seeking regularisation of a suspension period and the release of Delay Compensatory Relief Granted. The High Court directed the respondents to regularise the suspension, issue the NLC, and pay dues within specified timelines.

What did the court decide?

The respondents directed to regularise the suspension period, issue the NLC within one month, and pay DCRG within three months.

N.Lakshmikutty Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶4

WP(C).No. 16773 of 2011(V)

¶5

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

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

---------------------N.LAKSHMIKUTTY, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(RETD.) R/AT."THRIKARTHIKA", NEDUMPALLY HOUSE, PUTHOOR KARA, AYYANTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR-680003.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

-----------------------1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001.

¶11

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM-676505.

¶13

*** ADDITIONAL R4 IMPLEADED**

¶14

4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR - 670001.

¶15

ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28.09.2011 IN IA.NO.14433/2011

¶16

BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.A.J.JOSE

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WPC.NO.16773/2011

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXT.P1 : COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO.F.B.(A5)-7177/10 DATED 12.01.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXT.P2 : COPY OF REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.06.2011.

¶24

EXT.P3 : COPY OF REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.06.11.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A TO JUDGE

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 16773 of 2011 – V

¶30

Dated this the 27^th day of October, 2011

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

The petitioner who was working as a Special Tahsildar retired from the service on 31.3.2010. While in service, the petitioner was placed under suspension as per order dated 28/1/2010. Since the application filed by the petitioner for review was not positively dealt with, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.5444/2010, which was disposed of, directing the concerned respondent to have the review petition considered and finalised in accordance with law.

¶33

Based on the above verdict, the matter was considered and the petitioner was reinstated in service. No charge memo was issued to the petitioner till date of retirement. The DCRG payable to the petitioner was never released, for want of 'NLC ' to be issued by the concerned respondents. It was in the said circumstances, that the 2^nd respondent vide Ext.P1 letter dated 12.1.2011 directed the 3^rd respondent to take necessary steps to forward the 'NLC'; also alerting the said respondent as to the adverse consequences which might be resulted by way of

¶34

-2-

¶35

W.P.(C) No.16773/2011-V

¶36

interest to be paid, for the delay. It is stated that the concerned authority to forward the NLC is the District Collector, Kannur. In the said circumstance, the petitioner has moved the said respondent as well. There is also a case for the petitioner that the period of suspension from 11.2.2010 to 22.3.2010 is pending regularisation, despite the various requests made by the the petitioner as per Exts.P2 and P3.

¶37

No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, the respondents are hereby directed to pass appropriate orders with regard to the claim for regularisation of the period of suspension in accordance with the relevant provisions of law, as expeditiously as possible. The concerned respondent (respondent No.3/4) shall forward the 'NLC'/'LC', to the 2^nd respondent forthwith, at any rate, within one month. The amount due to the petitioner by way of DCRG and the amount due under any other heads, if any, pursuant to regularisation of the period of suspension shall be released to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,within

¶38

W.P.(C) No.16773/2011-V

¶39

-3-

¶40

three months.

¶41

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶42

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶43

rka

N.Lakshmikutty v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Lakshmikutty 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

M.J.Sibi John Vs the Sales Tax Officer

Jose Kuttiyani Vs the Secy.to Govt.

Thankamma Kuruvila Vs Asst.Executive Engineer,Kseb

B.Sanoosi Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Salam a Vs State of Kerala

Sivadas.K. Vs State of Kerala