Disposed

Sreekantan Nair.S v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jul 2016WP(C)/5204/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an employee against State and cooperative society respondents. The court directed the fourth respondent bank to pay retirement benefits within two months of the judgment date.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the fourth respondent bank to pay retirement benefits within two months from the date of receipt of the judgment copy.

Sreekantan Nair.S Vs 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 SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2016/24TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 5204 of 2016 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SREEKANTAN NAIR.S, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. P.R.SUKUMARAN NAIR, NALANDA, PALLICHAL, NEMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SMT.R.BINDU SRI.JOHNSON JOSE PANJIKKARAN SMT.P.ANJANA SRI.P.M.UNNI NAMBOODIRI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRTARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

4. PALLICHAL FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERTIVE BANK LTD NO. 677 VEDICACHAN KOIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR R4 BY ADV. SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 5204 of 2016 (A)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

P1- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF RESIGNATION DT. 04.8.2015 SUBMITTED BY HE PETITIO NER ALONGWITH POSTAL RECEIPT INDICATING ISSUANCE OF HE SAME OT THE PRESIDENT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS WELL AS ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR BY REGISTERED POST.

¶21

P1(A) - TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRNASLATION OF EXT. P1.

¶22

P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 22.9.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶23

P2(A) - TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P2.

¶24

P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 10.12.2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶25

P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 3.2.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE COPIES OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS.

¶26

P4(A) - TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶33

W.P.(C)NO.5204 OF 2016

¶34

Dated this the 15^th day of July, 2016

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner

¶37

seeking direction to the fourth respondent to consider Ext.P1 application submitted by the petitioner seeking resignation. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that already the application is accepted and the petitioner is permitted to resign.

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner

¶39

and learned standing counsel appearing for the fourth respondent. Even though, the grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this writ petition no more survives, learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends that the retiral benefits and other reliefs

¶40

to the petitioner will be delayed by the fourth respondent. Therefore, I think it is only appropriate

¶41

¶42

W.P.(C)NO.5204 OF 2016

¶43

that a direction is issued so, to the fourth respondent bank. The fourth respondent bank shall make every endeavour to pay the retiral benefits to the petitioner at the earliest and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶44

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶45

sd/-

¶46

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶47

R.AV

Sreekantan Nair.S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekantan Nair.S 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

Noorjahan Vs Basheer

Mohammed Iqbal, Rep.by Its Power of Attorney Holder Irshad A.S. Vs Sumi

The Manrothuruth Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs N.Thankappan

G Anil Vs Basheer

Surya Sankaranarayanan Vs the Regional Transport Authority

P.I.Sreedharan Vs the Chairman/Managing Director