IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 30071 of 2004(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ V.J.PAULOSE, RTD.DRIVER, MEMPARA PUTHENPURAYIL, MEMPARA P.O. PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV.SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R1&2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON 04/06/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 REPRESENTATION DT 3.5.99 SUBMITTED BEFORE R1. P2 REPRESENTATION DT 24.4.00 SUBMITTED BEFORE R1. P3 ORDER DT 23.3.02 BY R1. P4 MEMORANDUM DT 24.11.98. P5 JUDGMENT DT 30.6.04 IN OP.11338/02. P6 MEMORANDUM DT 13.9.04 ISSUED BY R1. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 30071 OF 2004 E ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 4th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Case of the petitioner in brief is as follows. The petitioner challenges Ext.P6. Ext.P6 is an order passed pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner was on medical leave for a period from 12.5.1981 to 29.12.1986 on production of medical certificate. His complaint is that some of the period in the said period is treated as leave without allowance eventhough he was eligible for leave on medical certificate. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation. But, without considering the request of the petitioner, Ext.P3 is passed by the 1st respondent. By Ext.P5 judgment, Ext.P3 came to be quashed and the matter was directed to be reconsidered. In Ext.P4 order, it is stated that medical certificate should be submitted within 30 days from the commencement of the leave if the leave is more than 30 days. In Ext.P6, it is the case that the petitioner was on unauthorised leave and that leave on medical ground was sanctioned when supported with medical WPC.30071/04 : 2 : certificate and leave without allowance was granted otherwise. The chief complaint of the petitioner is that he may not be entitled to count the period of leave without allowance for benefits. A counter affidavit is filed wherein it is, inter alia, stated as follows. “ The Corporation also counted his qualifying service as 23 years for his pensionary benefits including the period of leave without allowance sanctioned not on the strength of medical certificate. Hence the contention of the petitioner that the non- regularisation of the absence as leave on medical ground have affected the petitioner substantially, cannot be justified. It is also pertinent to note that petitioner had not achieved the basic pay (at the time of his retirement) equivalent to other drivers of having similar service in KSRTC. This is because of the fact that the petitioner was a habitual unauthorised absentee and he has been subjected to disciplinary action in several times. He had been punished more than 18 times for various occasions including criminal offences. As a part of the punishments, his increments were either withheld or postponed for a long period. In certain disciplinary cases, his leave was also regularised as leave without allowance as a punishment.” WPC.30071/04 : 3 : In the light of these averments which are not replied by a reply affidavit, it would appear that the basis of the complaint of the petitioner that the qualifying service suffers a diminution on account of a part of leave in 1981 to 1986 being given as leave without allowance may be without foundation. Apparently, the petitioner was visited with punishment as per disciplinary proceedings as stated in the counter and that may be the reason while the petitioner was not able to achieve basic pay at the time of retirement. However, in view of the statement contained in the counter affidavit that the period of LWA sanctioned not on the strength of medical certificate is also counted, I record the same and order that if the petitioner has any dispute or grievance about the same, he may bring it notice to the concerned authority and the concerned authority may look into it and take a decision thereon in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks