IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 28209 of 2006(G)
1. G.CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (CREDIT),
3. JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OP.
4. THE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.MOHANLAL
For Respondent :SRI.P.SIVARAJ
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.M.JAMES
Dated :14/02/2007
O R D E R
J.M.JAMES, J.
-------------------
W.P.(C). 28209/2006 (G)
--------------------
Dated this the 14th day of February, 2007
JUDGMENT
The writ petitioner was an employee of the
4th respondent, Urban Bank. He retired on 31.12.2003. As per
the G.O (P).No.217/05.Co-operation dated 22.8.2005, the
salaries and allowances of the employee of the Urban Banks
have been revised and re-fixed with effect from 1.4.2003.
2. The writ petitioner states that the benefits due
to him, as per the above said G.O., had been released on
31.12.2005. However, his pension has not been revised as per
the re-fixed salary and allowances, though the benefits of which
had already been released to him. He, therefore, made a
representation, Ext.P5, dated 14.6.2006 to the 4th respondent.
Similarly, he made another representation, Ext.P6, dated
25.8.2006, further requesting to grant him the gratuity as per
the revised scale. No action had so far been taken by the 4th
respondent, although the security amount of Rs.500/- had been
later released to him.
W.P.(C) No.28209/2006
: 2 :
3. When the matter came up for hearing, the
learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner pressed for an
early disposal of the matter. The respondent filed counter.
4. There is nothing before me to show that the
pension of the writ petitioner is revised as per the G.O. dated
22.8.2005. Therefore, the prayer of the writ petitioner, to grant
him all the benefits due under the revised G.O., is only legal and
just.
5. The counsel for the writ petitioner submits that
the 4th respondent is withholding the entire matter. In an
earlier occasion also, the writ petitioner was before this Court
through W.P.(C). No.33657/2004. On 2.3.2005, the Joint
Registrar passed another order, giving him an exemption from
the realisation of the amount, due from the writ petitioner.
6. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent
submits the petitioner is claiming pensionery benefits inclusive
of the period in which he was in service and drew the salary.
The counsel also submits that Exts.P5 and P6 representations
had not been received by the 4th respondent.
W.P.(C) No.28209/2006
: 3 :
7. After hearing both sides and in the above facts
situation, I direct the writ petitioner to file a fresh representation
before the 4th respondent, within one week from today. The 4th
respondent, the Urban Co-operative Bank shall hear the writ
petitioner and, thereafter, forward the entire service details of
the writ petitioner, in the light of the G.O dated 22/08/2005,
including all documents in the possession of the 4th respondent
to the 2nd respondent, the Additional Registrar (Credit), within
one week from the date of hearing of the writ petitioner.
8. The gratuity amount, if any, due to the writ
petitioner, basing on the last salary fixed by the 4th respondent,
according to G.O dated 22/08/2005, shall be paid to the writ
petitioner, within one month from the date of hearing of the writ
petitioner.
9. The second respondent shall issue order,
releasing all the revised pensionery benefits due to the writ
petitioner, as per G.O dated 22/08/2005, after taking into
consideration, the judgment, dated 28/01/2005, in W.P(C)
No.33657/2004, as well as the order of the Joint Registrar
W.P.(C) No.28209/2006
: 4 :
(General), dated 02/03/2005. The release of the pensionery
benefits shall be within two months from the date of receipt of
the records from the 4th respondent.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
J.M.JAMES
JUDGE
ms