Disposed

Abhilash P.A. v. the Managing Director, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Kerala HC14 Dec 2017WP(C)/40305/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Mechanic challenged withholding of service benefits pending disciplinary proceedings. Court did not decide merits, but directed Respondent Managing Director to expedite consideration of a subsequent representation within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed 1st respondent to consider Ext.P12 and pass orders within six weeks.

Abhilash P.A. Vs the Managing Director… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 40305 of 2017 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

ABHILASH P.A., AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. BALAN, PERUMPPETTE HOUSE, PANATHOOR P.O, PIN : 671 532, (MECHANIC - GRADE II, KSRTC, KASARAGOD DEPOT).

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

¶11

2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR(ADMINISTRATION) KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

¶12

3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER KSRTC, KASARAGOD DEPOT - 671531.

¶13

BY SHRI.T.P SAJAN, SC,

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C).No. 40305 of 2017 (K)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE DUTY PASS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 18.2.2016.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE AND FITNESS CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DR. SATHYENDRA C.D TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.7.2013.
EXHIBIT P5:	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. GL3/1026/12/KCDE DATED 16.8.2014.
EXHIBIT P6:	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. E1/3063/2014/KCDE DATED 12.8.2014.
EXHIBIT P7:	TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 24.10.2016.
EXHIBIT P8:	COPY OF THE STATEMENT 22/10/2016.
EXHIBIT P9:	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 31/5/2017 IN WPC NO.18056/2017 BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P10:	COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO. VLA1-10738/12 DT 6/10/2017.
EXHIBIT P11:	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 18/10/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12:	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO R1 ON 20/11/2017.
RESPONDENT(S	)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J. --------------------------------------W.P.(C).No.40305 of 2017

¶24

Dated this the 14^th day of December, 2017

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

The petitioner, who is working as a Mechanic at Kasaragod Depot of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, has approached this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to sanction and disburse the service benefits due to him, which were withheld from the year 2012 onwards on the ground of pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, in the light of Ext.P10 memorandum dated 06.10.2017 of the Executive Director (Vigilance) of the KSRTC and also Ext.P11 representation dated 18.10.2017 submitted before the 3^rd respondent and Ext.P12 representation and 20.11.2017 before the 1^st respondent.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶28

The learned Standing Counsel would submit that the 1^st respondent shall take appropriate decision on Ext.P12 representation dated 20.11.2017 submitted by the petitioner, after affording him an opportunity of being heard.

¶29

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P12 representation dated 20.11.2017, as expeditiously as

¶30

W.P.(C).No.40305 of 2017

¶31

¶32

possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶33

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in Ext.P12 and it is for the 1^st respondent to take appropriate decision, strictly in

¶34

accordance with law.

¶35

Sd/ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶36

Abhilash P.A. v. the Managing Director, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhilash P.A. v. the Managing Director, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

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

Savithri Vs the Senior Manager, Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

M.Sraju Vs Cherpulassery Co-Operative Urban Bank LTD.NO.1696

George Mathew Vs Assistant Registrar (General) of Co-Operative Societies

P.P.Alikoya Vs State of Kerala

P. Seethakumari Vs State of Kerala

Shykaja Nadesan Vs Arbitration & Execution Inspector-Ii