Kerala High Court
V.S Kunjappan vs Director on 8 April, 2014
Author: C.K.Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2014/18TH CHAITHRA, 1936
WP(C).No. 9836 of 2014 (D)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
V.S KUNJAPPAN, AGED 60,
S/O.SANKU, VALAYAMKANDATHIL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY
NAMBIYAPURAM, KOCHI-6.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN
SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN
SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR
SMT.K.M.RAMYA
SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR
SRI.K.S.MIZVER
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. DIRECTOR
URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. SECRETARY
CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM-682011.
BY SRI.RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAN,SC
BY SRI.P.K.SOYUZ,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 9836 of 2014 (D)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
--------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : PHOTO COPY OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO.WZH 9-416/2011 DT.2-
1-2013.
EXHIBIT P2 : PHOTO COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR CLOSING PROVIDENT FUND
ACCOUNT DT.12-6-13.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF R2 DT.25-2-2014 BEARING NO.MOA
22/416/2012.
EXHIBIT P4 : PHOTO COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF PENSION BOOK OF THE
PETITIONER.
//True Copy//
P.S. To Judge
Mrcs
C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.
-------------------------------
WP(C).NO. 9836 of 2014
---------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2014
JUDGMENT
Grievance is regarding non payment of eligible retirement benefits due to the petitioner, who retired as 'Sanitation Worker' from the service of the Corporation of Kochi. It is stated that, eventhough the monthly pension was sanctioned as per Ext.P3, the petitioner was denied of various other benefits such as amounts due under the PF account, arrears of pension, DCRG, commuted value of pension, arrears of DA etc. Hence the petitioner is approaching this court seeking appropriate direction against the 2nd respondent for payment of such benefits.
2. Despite time granted to the Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent to get instructions he could not furnish any details with respect to the subject matter involved. Considering the fact that the petitioner had retired as early as on 30.11.2013 there is no justification on the part of the 2nd respondent in indefinitely denying payment of the eligible benefits due. Interest of justice will be served by directing the 2nd respondent WP(C).9836 /2014 2 to consider the claims of the petitioner and to take an appropriate decision with respect to settlement of the retiral benefits legitimately due to the petitioner and to make payment of the same within a time limit to be stipulated.
3. Therefore this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to settle the claims of the petitioner with respect to payment of all terminal benefits due to him and to make payment of the eligible amounts due, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE
pmn/
WP(C).9836 /2014 3
WP(C).9836 /2014 4