Allowed

Ramanathan N. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Jun 2016OP(KAT)/76/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of an O.P.(KAT) where the petitioner sought immediate release of Deferred Contribution Retirement Gratuity following inordinate delay due to pending disciplinary proceedings. The Court noted the loss had been quantified and directed the disbursement of the entire DCRG within three months.

What did the court decide?

The entire Deferred Contribution Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) payable to the petitioner shall be disbursed immediately or within three months from the date of receipt of the judgment copy.

Ramanathan N. Vs the State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/8TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶7

OP(KAT).No. 76 of 2016 (Z)

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA(EKM) 950/2015 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 11-11-2015

¶9

PETITIONER(S):

¶10

RAMANATHAN N. AGED 59, S/O.NARAYANAN SECRETARY (RETIRED) THANNEERMUKKAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT THANNEERMUKKAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA 688527 RESIDING AT CHANGHAPARAMBIL, MUHAMMA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688525.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.J.OM PRAKASH SMT.NISHA BOSE

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.

¶15

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS COLLECTORATE P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688001.

¶16

R BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M. MUHAMMED SHAFI

¶17

THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

O.P.(KAT) NO. 76 OF 2016

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶21

EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF ORIGINAL APPLICATION (EKM) 950/15 ALONG WITH ANNEXURE. EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 11.11.2015

¶22

/TRUE COPY/

¶23

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶24

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON &

¶25

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶26

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

Ramachandra Menon, J.

¶29

Grievance of the petitioner is in respect of the inordinate delay in disbursing the DCRG, despite his retirement from service on attaining the age of superannuation more than three years ago.

¶30

Case of the petitioner is that he was working as the Secretary to the Thanneermukkam Grama Pachayath and just before the retirement, he was served with a show-cause notice as to why disciplinary proceedings shall not be initiated against him in relation to the auction of slaughter house and meat stall conducted in the year 2011 at Thalayolaparambu Grama Panchayath. The allegation was that, while working as the Secretary to Thalayolaparambu Grama Panchayath, the petitioner had committed irregularity by not collecting solvency amount, as Secretary, from the bidder of the slaughter house and meat stall in 2011, by virtue of which, the Panchayath could not recover the defaulted rent amount from the bidders.

¶31

O.P.(KAT) No. 76 of 2016

¶32

: 2 :

¶33

The petitioner submitted a detailed reply stating that there

¶34

was no lapse on his part; that the stalls were auctioned after renovation, pursuant to the sanction obtained from the Panchayath Committee; that the auction was conducted based on the norms as applicable to the other identical works undertaken earlier and that there was no provision to accept security from the lessee/licensee, but for collecting three months' rent in advance, which was complied with by the petitioner.

¶35

The proceedings were not taken to a logical conclusion and the petitioner retired from service on 30.09.2012. In view of the pending proceedings, only provisional pension was being paid to the petitioner, as borne by Annexure A1. Referring to the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, the DCRG was never disbursed and the petitioner was made to wait for more than three years. It was in the said circumstances, that the petitioner sought to approach the Kerala Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. (EKM) No. 950 of 2015 with the following prayers :

¶36

“(i) Call for the entire records which led to Annexures A2 and A3 and set aside the same.

¶37

(ii) Direct the 2^nd respondent to disburse entire DCRG with interest @ 8% per annum to the applicant, with

¶38

O.P.(KAT) No. 76 of 2016

¶39

: 3 :

¶40

effect from 30.03.2012 till date of payment.

¶41

(iii) Declare that no disciplinary proceedings is pending against applicant and no disciplinary action could be taken against applicant in furtherance to Annexures A2 and A3. (iv) grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶42

(v) award costs of this proceedings to the applicant.

¶43

The matter was considered by the Tribunal and Ext. P2 order was passed on 11.11.2015 directing the Government to take a decision, after hearing the applicant, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order and if there was no other legal impediment, to have the DCRG released as well.

¶44

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the relief granted by the Tribunal is quite inadequate in so far as there was no proceeding with regard to fixation of loss, if any. Since the petitioner had retired from service on 30.09.2012, in view of the mandate under Rule 3A (a) of Part III KSR, no further recovery was possible after three years.

¶45

When the matter came up for consideration on 20.06.2016, the learned Government Pleader was required to get instructions on these aspects. Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, it is brought to the notice of this Court

¶46

O.P.(KAT) No. 76 of 2016

¶47

: 4 :

¶48

that the proceedings have already been finalized by the Government by taking a decision to have the total loss quantified, to be realised from the monthly pension of the petitioner, @ Rs.50/- per month, for six months. A notice dated 18.05.2016 has been issued to the petitioner in this regard.

¶49

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not have any objection as to the course and events and seeks for a direction to have the DCRG released forthwith. In the above circumstances, the proceedings as per 30.03.2016 are let to remain. Without prejudice to such course of action, the entire DCRG payable to the petitioner shall be disbursed immediately; at any rate, within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶50

The Original Petition stands disposed of.

¶51

sd/-

¶52

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶53

sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶54

kmd

¶55

/True copy/

¶56

P.A. to Judge

Ramanathan N. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanathan N. v. the State of Kerala

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

T.B.Pradeep Vs Kollam Municipal Corporation

Baby Joseph Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Sumini Catherine Vs State of Kerala

Neesha M.N Vs Mini T.B

R.Jalajakumari Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Nair G.S Vs Kerala Public Service Commission