Disposed

Baby.K.v v. the Director

Kerala HC8 Sept 2021WP(C)/16227/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired employee filed a writ petition seeking fringe benefits. The court directed the Principal Agriculture Officer (third respondent) to consider the petitioner's representation expeditiously and dispose of it on merits within one month, then disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and dispose of it on merits within one month.

Baby.K.v Vs the Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 17TH BHADRA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 16227 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

1 BABY.K.V AGED 62 YEARS W/O SUBRAMANYAM, RESIDING AT KALLATTU HOUSE, PAZHUVIL P.O, KURUMBILAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 564.

¶7

BY ADVS. P.S.SUJETH M.R.REENA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS BHAVAN, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033

¶10

2 THE SENIOR AGRICULTURE OFFICER, THE KERALA STATE SEED FARM, EDATHIRUTHY, THRISSUR, PIN-680 703.

¶11

3 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER, THRISSUR CHEMBUKKAVU, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 020.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI. A.S.DHEERAJ,GP

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

WP(C) NO. 16227 OF 2021

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Dated this the 08^th day of September, 2021

¶18

The petitioner retired from service of the Kerala State Agricultural Seed Farm at Edathiruthy in the year 2019. The grievance of the petitioner is that she has not been paid the fringe benefits which she is otherwise entitled to. Claiming that, she submitted Ext.P2 representation before the third respondent. The limited prayer sought by the petitioner at the time of hearing was to consider Ext.P2 representation as expeditiously as possible.

¶19

Having considered this and after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents, I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition itself, by directing the third respondent

¶20

to take up and consider Ext.P2 representation and to dispose it of on merits, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of

¶21

WP(C) NO. 16227 OF 2021

¶22

¶23

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶24

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/8-9

WP(C) NO. 16227 OF 2021

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16227/2021

¶32

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.12.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE SENIOR OFFICER STATE SEED FARM-EDATHIRUTHY THRISSUR

¶34

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.3.2021 SUBMITTED TO THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR

¶35

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO A(3) 1707/2021, DATED 5.3.2021 OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURE OFFICER

¶36

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DA-EXCESS CHART GIVEN BY THE SENIOR AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, EDATHIRUTHY, THRISSUR FROM 1.1.2016 TO 31.1.2017

¶37

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶38

TRUE COPY

¶39

P.A. TO JUDGE

Baby.K.v v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baby.K.v v. the Director

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

Kavitha Rajan Vs Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

Ayisha Moosa Vs Shaju N.I.

Sudhir Antony Joseph Vs Anil Kumar

Rema.S., Vs State of Kerala

Babu Sebastian Vs Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd.

Suja George, Vs State of Kerala