High Court Kerala High Court

V.Kannan vs The Kerala State Road Transport on 31 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
V.Kannan vs The Kerala State Road Transport on 31 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3652 of 2009(I)


1. V.KANNAN, RETD. INSPECTOR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.P.K.PRIYA

                For Respondent  :SHRI.JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :31/03/2009

 O R D E R
                            S. Siri Jagan, J.
              =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                      W. P (C) No. 3652 of 2009
              =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                  Dated this, the 31st March, 2009.

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a retired employee of the Kerala State Road

Transport Corporation. In this writ petition, he seeks interest on his

DCRG and commutted value of pension on the ground that the same

were paid belatedly. According to the petitioner, he retired from

service on 30-6-2001 and the retirement benefits were paid on 5-6-

2004. The petitioner seeks interest for the period from 30-6-2001 to

5-6-2004.

2. Learned standing counsel for the Corporation submits that

the Corporation is paying DCRG and commutted value of pension due

to retired employees of the Corporation on the basis of the scheme

framed by the Division Bench of this Court, according to priority.

Learned standing counsel submits that DCRG and commutted value of

pension due to the petitioner were paid to him immediate when his

turn came in accordance with the date of priority of retirement as per

the scheme framed by this Court. He further submits that the scheme

framed by this Court does not envisage payment of interest for such

delayed payment.

3. Counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the fact that the

DCRG and commutted value of pension due to the petitioner had

been paid as and when his turn came in accordance with the scheme.

In the above circumstances, I do not think that the petitioner can

claim interest in so far as the scheme framed by this Court does not

envisage payment of interest on the delayed payment. Therefore, I do

not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is

dismissed.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/

[True copy]

P.S to Judge.