IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2011 / 7TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 13954 of 2011(T) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.M.JOSHUA, S/O. MATHEW, AGED 62 YEARS, RETIRED ADDITIONAL VILLAGE ASSISTANT/ADDITIONAL VILLAGE OFFICER, NOW RESIDING AT 'MAMMOTTIL' HOUSE, NATHANAPOY, KELAKAM, POST KOTTIYUR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, KANNUR TALUK, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR-670 002. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR-670 002. 3. THE FINANCIAL OFFICER TO DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR-670 002. 4. THE COMMISSIONER (LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT), NEAR MUSEUM, VIKASBHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 5. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 039. 6. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, KANNUR SUB TREASURY, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR-670 002. ADV. MR. SANDESH RAJ - GOVT. PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13954 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY R2 DTD 2.1.2001. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER OF R2 DTD 7.3.2001. EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY R2 DTD 10.1.2003. EXT.P4: COPY OF REPRESENTATION BEFORE R2 DTD 27.4.04. EXT.P5: COPY OF REPRESENTATION BEFORE R2 DTD 5.8.2005. EXT.P6: COPY OF COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY R2 DTD 7.2.07. EXT.P7: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SENT TO THE COMMISSIONER DTD 14.2.07. EXT.P8: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SENT TO THE RESPONDENTS 1 &2 ALONG WITH ENCLOSURES DTD 23.3.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.13954 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner retired from service on 31.5.2004. DCRG due to the petitioner is not being released on the ground that a vigilance case charged in 2002 is stil pending. According to the petitioner, it is unjust to withhold DCRG due to the petitioner even now when the end of the vigilance case is nowhere in sight. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision of this Court in Aravindaksha Panicker v. Accountant General [2007(4) KLT 1031] in support of the contention that pendency of a vigilance case is not a ground to withhold the DCRG. 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that a Division Bench of this Court has held that the DCRG cannot be released, if the vigilance case is pending. He relies on the decision of this Court in Sreepath Bhatt v. Tahsildar[2004(3) KLT SN 17 (Case No.22)]. W.P.(C)No.13954/11 2 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. It is no secret that in Kerala vigilance cases take years to culminate in a judgment. Here, the vigilance case started in 2002. Nobody can, with any amount of certainty, say as to within what time it would end. In the above circumstances, I am of opinion that the respondents can release the DCRG due to the petitioner, after obtaining a bond under Rule 116 of Part III of KSR. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to see that the DCRG due to the petitioner is released, after obtaining a bond under Rule 116 of Part III of KSR. The petitioner shall submit the bond within two weeks and the DCRG shall be released within one month from the date of submission of the bond. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.13954/11 3 W.P.(C)No.13954/11 4