High Court Kerala High Court

K.P.Jayaprakash vs Chengannur Municipality on 4 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.P.Jayaprakash vs Chengannur Municipality on 4 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 14204 of 2008(N)


1. K.P.JAYAPRAKASH, KALLELIL, KIZHAKKENADA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. CHENGANNUR MUNICIPALITY,CHENGANNUR ,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.SASIKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN, SC, MC, CHENGANNUR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :04/07/2008

 O R D E R
                             V.GIRI,J.
                      -------------------------
                 W.P ( C) No. 14204 of 2008
                      --------------------------
                Dated this the 4th July, 2008

                        J U D G M E N T

Petitioner retired from the Chengannur Municipality

as Superintendent on 30.6.2007. By Exhibit-P1, terminal

leave surrender benefits were sanctioned to the

petitioner. By Exhibit-P2, DCRG and Commuted Value of

Pension were sanctioned. Petitioner is aggrieved by

notwithstanding the order of sanction except the pension,

other amounts are yet to be received.

2. First respondent has filed a statement. It is

clear that no liability as such is fixed against the

petitioner. The stand taken by the Municipality is that

amounts are due to the Municipality from the State and

that has not been disbursed in full. In the meanwhile, in

Exhibit -P2, the Director has directed the Municipality to

pay the amounts due to the petitioner from the amounts

due from the Municipality to the State by way of

contribution to the Central Pension Fund. This

W.P ( C) No. 14204 of 2008
2

according to the learned counsel for the Municipality is

unjustified.

3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned Government Pleader and learned standing counsel

for the 1st respondent Municipality.

4. Exhibit-P2 order passed by the Director is

categoric and as long as it remains, it is binding on the

Municipality as well. In the circumstances, the Municipality

is bound to disburse the DCRG and Commuted Value of

Pension due to the petitioner in terms of Exhibit-P2.

Petitioner has a claim for revision of retirement benefits

and the same is pending orders as Exhibit-P7 before the

Director. The Director will have to take a decision on this

aspect.

5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in

the following terms:

i) First respondent shall disburse to the

petitioner the amount sanctioned under Exhibit-P2

within a period of two months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment.

W.P ( C) No. 14204 of 2008
3

ii) First respondent shall also pay the salary arrears

due to the petitioner on the basis of Exhibit-P6 within

the aforementioned time frame.

iii) Second respondent shall pass orders on Exhibit-

P7 within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. Thereupon,

appropriate steps shall be taken by the 1st respondent

in consonance with the same.

iv) Arrears of pension due to the petitioner for the

period from 1.7.2007 till 3.6.2007 shall also be paid by

the 1st respondent, within a period of two months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(V.GIRI, JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No. 14204 of 2008
4

W.P ( C) No. 14204 of 2008
5