IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5812 of 2010(B) PETITIONER: ----------------- D.KRISHNAN NAMBIAR, RETIRED RANGE OFFICER, PUSHPAKAM, THURUTHY.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV.MR.G.SHRIKUMAR MR.SREEJITH S.NAIR SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, FLYING SQUAD DIVISION, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST(ADMN.), OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY MR. ANTONY MUKKATH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 5812 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from the service of the Forest Department on 31.12.2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the lapse of about more than one year since his retirement, the retiral benefits due to him have not been disbursed. 2. According to the petitioner the sole impediment in granting of such benefit was only the non-declaration of his probation in the category of Range Officer. He has completed the period of probation as early as on 20.3.2002 and the Divisional Forest Officer has already recommended for declaration of his promotion as early as on 23.7.2005. It is only on account of the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in considering the said recommendation for the purpose of declaring the probation of the petitioner that the petitioner is not able to get the retiral benefits. For getting redressal of such grievance, the petitioner had already approached the first respondent by Exts.P2 to P4. Despite the WPC.5812 of 2010 : 2 : receipt of such representations, no action has so far been taken, it is submitted. The grievances raised by the petitioner in Exts. P2 to P4 are matters which require consideration by the respondents. In fact, they are having a bounden duty to look into his grievances and for taking appropriate action for sanctioning the retiral benefits to the petitioner. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider Exts.P2 to P4 and to take appropriate action for sanctioning the retiral benefits, due to the petitioner expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A. To Judge