High Court Kerala High Court

N. Govindan Nair vs Sree Chithira Tirunal Institute on 30 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
N. Govindan Nair vs Sree Chithira Tirunal Institute on 30 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP.No. 30427 of 2000(V)



1. N. GOVINDAN NAIR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. SREE CHITHIRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.R.RAVI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :30/03/2009

 O R D E R
                             S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                      ==================

                         O.P.No. 30427 of 2000

                      ==================

                Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009

                             J U D G M E N T

In this original petition, the petitioner is challenging Exts.P1, P2

and P3. Ext.P1 is the report of the enquiry officer, wherein in a

domestic enquiry against the petitioner on certain allegations of

misconducts, the petitioner was found guilty. Ext.P2 is the order of

punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the petitioner with

effect from 1.7.1988. Ext.P3 is the appellate order reducing the

punishment to one of compulsory retirement with effect from

1.7.1988. The petitioner has embarked on several litigations and he

reached nowhere on merits, because of technical difficulties in the

matter of raising an industrial dispute. In the above circumstances,

since, in order to get a decision on merits, the petitioner has to again

go through the cumbersome and time consuming process of raising an

industrial dispute and getting the same adjudicated before the Labour

Court or Industrial Tribunal, the petitioner submits that if the

respondents are amenable to compulsory retirement with effect from

12.10.1989, instead of 1.7.1988, he would be satisfied by the same, in

so far as, in that case, he would become eligible for pension. I put it to

the counsel for the respondents as to whether they are amenable to

the said course of action. Today the learned counsel for the

2

respondents submits that the governing body has considered the said

suggestion and has taken a decision to treat the compulsory

retirement of the petitioner as valid with effect from 12.10.1989

instead of 1.7.1988. This is recorded. The counsel for the respondents

submits that some more time would be required for complying with the

formalities for effectuating that decision. The respondents shall

complete the formalities and pay terminal benefits due to the

petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three

months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

The original petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

sdk+                                              S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

         ///True copy///




                         P.A. to Judge

     S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

==================

 O.P.No. 30427 of 2000-V

==================




     J U D G M E N T


    30th March, 2009