Disposed

Hudson.K v. Treasury Officer

Kerala HC2 Nov 2011WP(C)/9935/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired librarian stopped drawing pension due to mandatory personal verification lapse, filed writ petition for continuance and arrears discharge. Court directed petitioner to appear for verification by late November 2011, with arrears to be disbursed within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to appear for verification by late November 2011; respondent to disburse arrears within two months thereafter.

Hudson.K Vs Treasury Officer — 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

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 9935 of 2011(N)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

HUDSON.K., LIBRARIAN (RETD.), DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES, KARTHIKA, STC 15/630, USRA, V9, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT C9, DOORADARSHAN QUARTERS, VIYOOR.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. MR. C.K.MOHANAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

TREASURY OFFICER, PENSION PAYMENT TREASURY, UPPALAM ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 039.

¶14

ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, P.B.NO.5607, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 039.

¶15

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. A. J. JOSE EDAYODI

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(c) 9935 OF 2011

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶20

EXT. P1 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 11.09.2003

¶21

/TRUE COPY/

¶22

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶23

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶24

¶25

W.P (C) No . 9935 of 2011

¶26

¶27

Dated, this the 2^nd day of November, 2011

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner, who was working as a librarian in the Industrial Department, retired from service in the year 2003. By virtue of the authorization given in favour of his wife, he was drawing pension till April, 2005. But, the disbursement of pension was subsequently stopped for want of personal verification. The case of the petitioner iss that, by virtue of alternate employment, he was staying in Chennai and he could not be present before the first respondent for personal verification. But in spite of his subsequent appearance before the Board in February 2011, the first respondent is not disbursing the pension, which made the petitioner to approach this Court for appropriate relief.

¶30

A detailed counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the first respondent, stating that, by virtue of the relevant Rule position, the petitioner is not entitled to draw pension indefinitely, standing behind the curtain and that personal verification is mandatory for payment of pension. The stand of the first respondent is discernible from

¶31

W.P. (C) No. 9935 of 2011

¶32

: 2 :

¶33

paragraph 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit, which are extracted below:

¶34

4. It is submitted that the non-payment of pension from May, 2005 is as per provisions in KSR and Kerala Treasury Code and there is no illegal action in the part of the then Sub Treasury Officer. The rule position and the Government Orders restricts the disbursing authorities regarding the payment of monthly pension undrawn for three years and above. The petitioner has drawn pension up to April 2005 only and it requires sanction from the Accountant General (A & E), Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram for further payments.

¶35

5. It is submitted that Rule 136 Part III KSR restricts the disbursing officer to discontinue the arrears of the pensioner subsequently appears after three years from the last drawal of pension without the sanction of the audit officer. If the pensioner appear before the Sub Treasury Officer in person and put his signature in the Registrar, necessary action will be taken to revalidate the Pension Payment Order by the Accountant General (A&E), Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram and disbursement of arrears ofpension will be made as and when sanction from the Accountant General (A & E) Kerala Thiruvananthapuram received.

¶36

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶37

petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the first respondent on any other day and a direction may be given to the first respondent to consider the matter and finalize the proceedings for continuing the pension payment.

¶38

W.P. (C) No. 9935 of 2011

¶39

: 3 :

¶40

In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the first respondent during the working hours of any of the working day in the last week of November, 2011 with all relevant records, upon which, further steps shall be taken by the first respondent to facilitate the payment of pension. The arrears if any, shall be disbursed within two months thereafter.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶43

kmd

Hudson.K v. Treasury Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hudson.K v. Treasury Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalithambika Vs State of Kerala

A.K.Anand Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

M.Sanjay Vs Union of India

P.Narayanan Namboodiri Vs State of Kerala and Others

P.Asok Kumar Vs Department of Revenue

Anilkumar.T Vs the Kerla State Electricity Board