Allowed

R. Dakshayani (Retd. Principal) v. the Administrator

Kerala HC1 Sept 2014WP(C)/15549/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged non-payment of retirement benefits, DA arrears, and UDISHA scheme funds. The court held pleadings were unrebutted due to respondent's failure to file a counter affidavit and directed immediate disbursement with 7% interest for delay.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to release pensionary benefits, PF, D.A. arrears, and five years' increments within two months or pay 7% annual interest.

R. Dakshayani (Retd. Principal) Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/10TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 15549 of 2013 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

R. DAKSHAYANI (RETD. PRINCIPAL), AAROODAM, EAST YAKKARA, PALAKKAD-678013.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL. S

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE ADMINISTRATOR, KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR CHILD WELFARE, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶11

2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR CHILD WELFARE, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶12

3. THE PRINCIPAL,

¶13

ANGANAVADI TRAINING CENTRE, PALAKKAD-678001.

¶14

R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K. JOSE, SC, KSCCW R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LOWSY.A.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 15549 of 2013 (P)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER NO.1729/82-83 DT.27.12.1982.

¶21

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A.C.2/4850/05/K.S.C.W.S. DT.14.10.2005.

¶22

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.AWTC/2463/KSCCW/2010 DT.14.11.2010.

¶23

EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.07.03.2013 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.05.04.2013 FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶25

EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15.04.2013.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶32

W.P.(C)No.15549 OF 2013

¶33

Dated this the 1^st September, 2014

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

Non payment of retirement benefits and DA arrears to the

¶36

petitioner forms the subject matter of challenge herein.

¶37

The petitioner entered into service on 14.12.1983 as

¶38

Health and Nutrition Instructress and retired from the service on 30.09.2005 while working as the Principal of Anganwadi Training Centre, Palakkad. As per Ext.P2 order dated 14.10.2005 issued

¶39

by the first respondent/Administrator, Kerala State Council for Child Welfare, D.A. arrears were sanctioned to the petitioner for the relevant period. Thereafter, vide Ext.P3 dated 14.11.2010 sanction was given to have pension benefits (EPF), an amount of Rs.51694/- under the 'Udisha' Scheme and D.A. arrears sanctioned retrospectively w.e.f. 2007. As per the very same order, sanction was also given for granting 'five' yearly increments (plus D.A) for the period from 1993-1997. Since nothing transpired in the positive, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation to have disbursement. Then the petitioner was let known as per Ext.P5 dated 05.04.2013, stating that the petitioner had not submitted the requisite application in the 'prescribed form' for release of the EPF amount, also informing

¶40

¶41

W.P.(C)No.15549 OF 2013

¶42

her that a report had already been called for from the Principal of the Training Centre, Palakkad for releasing the amount under the 'Udisha' Scheme. The petitioner sought to clarify the position by submitting Ext. P6 dated 15.04.2013, sent by Registered Post, pointing out that the idea and understanding of the first respondent/Administrator as given in Ext.P5 was not correct. The eligibility of the petitioner to have the due amount was asserted vide Ext.P6. Still, there was no response, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition.

¶43

Heard the learned Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader.

¶44

The writ petition was admitted as early as on 04.09.2013, after ordering notice on admission by Speed Post on

¶45

19.06.2013.The proceedings dated 04.09.2013 read as follows:

¶46

“Admit. The Learned Govt. Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents one and two. Issue notice by Speed Post to the third respondent.

¶47

The respondents shall file counter affidavit, if any, within a period of five weeks. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner retired from service as early as on 30/09/2005 it is made clear that no further time will be granted for filing affidavit.”

¶48

Respondents were granted further time for filing counter

¶49

¶50

W.P.(C)No.15549 OF 2013

¶51

as per order dated 04.04.2014. The matter was listed before this

¶52

Court on not less than 'six' occasions thereafter. There is no improvement with regard to the position and no counter affidavit has been filed from the part of any of the respondents. In the said circumstance, this Court cannot but hold that the pleadings stand unrebutted and that there cannot be any dispute with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner to have the reliefs sought for .

¶53

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to release the pensionary benefits, PF, amount of Rs.51694/- due under the 'Udisha' Scheme as arrears of salary, D.A. arrears, five years' increment for the period 1993 to 1997, as flowing from Ext.P3 immediately. Disbursement shall be effected at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, failing which, it will carry interest at the rate of 7% per annum. The writ petition stands allowed to the said extent. No cost.

¶54

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶55

R. Dakshayani (Retd. Principal) v. the Administrator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Dakshayani (Retd. Principal) v. the Administrator

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. Kunjumon Vs Shri. K. Ramachandan

Mujeeb C.H Vs v.Somasundaran

Dr.K.Jayaraj Vs K.M.Abraham

K.K.Biju Vs P.Shajahan

Dr.Rekha U.S. Vs State of Kerala

M. Abdul Jabbar Vs the Kerala Water Authority