Allowed

Dr.Thomas Koilparambil, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Nov 2023WP(C)/15903/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a retired oncologist, sought directions to disburse arrears of salary and pension, withheld due to a pending vigilance enquiry. The Court held that with the enquiry closed and no charges recommended, the benefits must be disbursed forthwith.

What did the court decide?

Disbursal of arrears of salary and pensionary benefits, including monthly pension, with 9% interest per annum if not paid within one month.

Dr.Thomas Koilparambil, Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶2

WP(C) NO. 15903 OF 2021

¶3

PETITIONER/S:

¶4

DR.THOMASKOILPARAMBIL,
AGED67YEARS
S/O.SEBASTIANJOSEPH,RESIDINGATCHRISTMAS,HOUSE
NO.13/1606(1),BURMAROAD,KUMARAPURAM,MEDICAL
COLLEGEP.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695011.

¶5

BYADVS.
V.N.GOPALAKRISHNANNAIR
A.CHANDRABABU
G.ARUN
G.VARUN

¶6

RESPONDENTS:

¶7

1STATEOFKERALA,
REPRESENTEDBYSECRETARYTOHEALTHANDSOCIAL
WELFARE,GOVERNMENTSECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

2REGIONALCANCERCENTRE(RCC),
REPRESENTEDBYITSDIRECTOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BYADVS

¶10

SRI.ATHULSHAJI,SCFORREGIONALCANCERCENTRE
SMT.MARYBEENAJOSEPH,SR.GOVERNMENTPLEADER

¶11

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
24.11.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶12

W.P(C) No.15903 of 2021

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

¶16

i. A writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or direction may be issued to the respondents to disburse the arrears of salary and pensionary benefits, including the monthly pension legally due to the petitioner along with 8.5% interest per annum for all the above said amounts legally due to the petitioner from the date of his retirement on 30.04.2016 to the date of disbursement, forthwith.

¶17

It is the case of the petitioner that he had attained superannuation on 30.4.2016 while working as an Oncologist at the Regional Cancer Centre (RCC), Thiruvananthapuram. He contends that a sum of about Rs.2,25,000/- towards arrears of salary and about 38 lakhs towards pensionary benefits are due to the petitioner from the RCC. In addition, monthly pension is also due. The petitioner asserts that the amounts due to the petitioner are being withheld on the ground that a vigilance case is pending against the petitioner herein. The petitioner asserts that the vigilance case has been closed, and there is no justification on the part of the respondents in not disbursing the amount due to him. He asserts that, requesting disbursal of amount, he has preferred Ext.P5 representation. However, no action has been taken. It is in the afore circumstances that this

¶18

W.P(C) No.15903 of 2021

¶19

¶20

Writ Petition is filed seeking directions.

¶21

I find that along with the counter, the respondents have placed on record Ext R2(g) communication issued by the RCC to the petitioner. In the said letter dated 27.7.2021, it is stated that the petitioner was placed under suspension in terms of the directions issued by the Government in the context of vigilance enquiry initiated against the petitioner herein. It is further stated that as the case has been registered, his request for disbursement of retirement benefits will be made only after the outcome of the vigilance case.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has referred to Ext.P14 letter issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government to the Director RCC, Thiruvananthapuram, wherein it is stated that the Vigilance and Anticorruption Bureau has completed its investigation and has submitted factual report to the Government wherein it is stated that there is no scope for successful prosecution or departmental action against the petitioner herein. It is further stated that certain offences under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 are suspected to have been committed by the accused, and the Director had therefore recommended a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The learned counsel submits that the Government has requested the RCC, after stating the above facts, to release

¶23

W.P(C) No.15903 of 2021

¶24

¶25

all the pensionary benefits, including pension, under intimation to the Government.

¶26

I have considered the submissions advanced and gone through

¶27

the records. From Ext.R2(g), it appears that it is on account of the pendency of vigilance enquiry that the amount was not disbursed to the petitioner. Now that the vigilance case has been closed, as evident from Ext.P14, and directions have been issued to disburse the benefits by the Government, there is no justification on the part of the respondents in not disbursing the amounts legally due to the petitioner, which include retirement benefits.

¶28

In that view of the matter, in terms of the directions issued in Ext.P14,

¶29

all necessary steps shall be taken to disburse the arrears of salary and pensionary benefits, including the monthly pension legally due to the petitioner from the date of his retirement on 30.04.2016 after intimating the Government as ordered. If the amount is not paid within one month from today, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date the amount became due.

¶30

This petition is disposed of.

¶31

Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

¶32

IAP

¶33

W.P(C) No.15903 of 2021

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15903/2021

¶36

`PETITION`	`ER’S EXH`	`IBITS:`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED` `12/07/2000.`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL REQUEST DATED` `04/04/2020.`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE` `2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED` `26/05/2020.`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE SERVICE RULES.`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED` `11/06/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE` `2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH LEGIBLE COPY.`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION` `DATED 27.7.1981.`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT IN CRL.MC` `NO.5223/2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT` `OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM DATED 20.9.2019.`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 15-10-1999.`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE INAUGURAL EDITION RELEASED` `BY THE HIS EXCELLENCY, PRESIDENT OF INDIA` `LAST EDITION SAID JOURNAL.`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE COPY OF THE INAUGURAL EDITION RELEASED` `BY THIS EXCELLENCY, PRESIDENT OF INDIA LAST` `EDITION SAID JOURNAL`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/08/2006`

¶37

W.P(C) No.15903 of 2021

¶38

¶39

`Exhibit P11(a)`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/08/2006.`
`Exhibit P12`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18-5-2009` `FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF RCC TO` `THE GOVERNMENT.`
`Exhibit P13`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT` `DATED 19-01-2012.`
`Exhibit P14`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23-4-2023` `PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO` `GOVERNMENT`

¶40

RESPONDENTS’EXHIBITS:

¶41

`Exhibit R2 A`	`TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 15.2.2012` `ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO` `GOVERNMENT`
`Exhibit R2 B`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.2.2012` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit R2 C`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF REINSTATEMENT` `DATED 15.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND` `RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit R2 D`	`TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED` `30.3.2016`
`Exhibit R2 E`	`TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS DATED` `30.03.2016`
`Exhibit R2 F`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 5.4.2016 SENT BY` `THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit R2 G`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED` `27.7.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN`

Dr.Thomas Koilparambil, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.Thomas Koilparambil, 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

Jenny Jose.M. Vs State of Kerala

Johny Joseph Vs High Court of Kerala

Ramlath K., Vs State of Kerala

The Malappuram District Co-Operative Bank Vs Kerala State Co-Operative Employees Pension Board

Sivanandan.M Vs M/S India Telephone Industries Limited

K.Venugopal Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ksrtc