Disposed

K. Asokan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Mar 2024WP(C)/7219/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired municipal contingent worker sought directions to the Municipality to disburse his monthly pension, gratuity, pension commutation and retirement benefits. The court directed Aluva Municipality to pay within four months, failing which interest at 6% per annum would run from the due date.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 3rd respondent to pay pension, gratuity, commutation and retirement benefits within four months; on failure, 6% per annum interest from due date till payment.

K. Asokan Vs State of Kerala — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 7219 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K. ASOKAN

¶8

AGED 61 YEARS, S/O KARUPPAN, MUNICIPAL COLONY, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101 BY ADVS. C.Y.VINOD KUMAR MANOJ VASU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVT. DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695001

¶11

2 DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF URBAN AFFAIRS, SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANDANCODE P.O., KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695003

¶12

3 ALUVA MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE, PERIYAR NAGAR, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 683101

¶13

4 SECRETARY

¶14

ALUVA MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, PERIYAR NAGAR, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101

¶15

BY ADVS. K T THOMAS NIKHIL BERNY(K/674/2014)

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SR GP SMT MARY BEENA JOSEPH

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 7219/2024

-2-

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 20^th day of March 2024)

¶23

The petitioner approached this Court for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to disburse the monthly pension, gratuity, pension commutation and retirement benefits to

¶24

the petitioner within a time frame.

¶25

As per Ext.P1, the pensionary benefits of the

¶26

contingent workers in the Municipality and Corporation were revised, and the petitioner is entitled to revised pensionary benefits. Though the petitioner filed Ext.P2 representation before the 4^th respondent, no action has been

¶27

taken on Ext.P2.

¶28

The Standing Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submits that, the only reason for non-disbursal is that, due

¶29

to flood and Covid-19, the Municipality is going through an

¶30

WPC 7219/2024

¶31

-3-

¶32

acute financial crisis. It is also stated that the Municipality

¶33

needs reasonable time to release the benefits due to the petitioner.

¶34

Taking into consideration that the petitioner was a contingent worker in the Municipality and retired on 31.03.2023, and was not paid the retirement benefits, there will be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to pay the monthly pension, gratuity, pension commutation and retirement benefits to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In the

¶35

case of failure to pay the amounts within the stipulated time, the amounts will carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the actual due date till payment.

¶36

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI JUDGE

WPC 7219/2024

-4-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7219/2024

¶43

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶44

Exhibit P1	COPY OF THE G.O. (P) NO. 168/2021/FIN. DATED 08/12/2021
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03/01/23
	SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3	COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 03/01/23
	ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE ALUVA MUNICIPALITY

K. Asokan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Asokan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tara.G., Vs the Chairman

Chandra Babu K.A. Vs Union of India

Muralisharma v K Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Biju.P.C., Vs State of Kerala

Meppady Grama Panchayath Vs the State of Kerala

Sreekala. B, Vs Managing Director