High Court Kerala High Court

V.K.Purushothaman vs The Forest Range Officer on 18 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
V.K.Purushothaman vs The Forest Range Officer on 18 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 31720 of 2010(L)


1. V.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 56 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,

3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,

4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :18/11/2010

 O R D E R
                        S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   W.P.(C)No. 31720 of 2010
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner retired as a Forester from the Forest

Department of the Government of Kerala on 31.03.2010.

The petitioner submits that, on a trivial charge, disciplinary

proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by

Ext.P1. But the petitioner’s retirement benefits are not

being disbursed to the petitioner. The petitioner therefore

seeks the following reliefs:

“i. issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or
direction, directing the respondents to release the
retiral/pensionary benefits due to the petitioner
forthwith.”

2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions

submits that, disciplinary proceedings are pending against

the petitioner and therefore under Rule 3A of Part III of

K.S.R., retirement benefits cannot be disbursed to the

petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner points out that,

Rule 3A does not authorise withholding of provisional

W.P.(C)No. 31720 of 2010
-2-

pension atleast. He further submits that, after his

retirement more than seven months have already elapsed

and it is unjust to prolong disciplinary proceedings and

withhold retirement benefits due to the petitioner.

3. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ

petition with the following directions:

The petitioner shall be paid provisional pension as

contemplated under Rule 3A of Part III of K.S.R.

within one month from today. The disciplinary

proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall

be completed as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate within four months from the date of receipt of

a copy of this judgment. If the disciplinary

proceedings are not completed within the said

period, the entire retirement benefits due to the

petitioner shall be disbursed to the petitioner

within one month thereafter, after obtaining a

bond as contemplated under Rule 116.

S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE
shg/