IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 25842 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.K.DIVAKARAN, RETIRED ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, RESIDING AT IRATTAPLAMOOTTIL, VENGOOR, KIDANGOOR P.O., ANGAMALY. BY ADV. MR. P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR. A. JAYASANKAR, SC, KSHB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kkms/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.25842 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was working as an Assistant Engineer under the 1st respondent. He retired from service on 31/10/2007. His grievance is that pension, DCRG and other terminal benefits have not been released to him. According to the petitioner, the reason is the pendency of Ext.P1 memo of charges issued to him. However, it is stated that the liability, which is the subject matter of Ext.P1, has since been settled, and therefore, Ext.P1 should not stand in the way of the respondents in releasing the terminal benefits. 2. On instructions, the learned standing counsel submits that though the liability, which is the subject matter of Ext.P1, has been settled, for want of clearance from the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, to which also the matter was reported, they are not in a position to proceed further with Ext.P1. That apart, it is also stated that in connection with valuation of a security, and also in relation to an audit objection, liability is still outstanding from the WP(C) No.25842/2009 -2- petitioner. 3. From the above, it is evident that liabilities against the petitioner are yet to be settled. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has retired from service as early as on 31/10/2007, I do not think there is any justification for non-disbursement of the eligible amount that is due to the petitioner. Therefore, without prejudice to any action that is permissible against the petitioner, it is directed that the respondents shall settle the liability that is due from the petitioner and out of the terminal benefits, and release the admitted amount that is due to him. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg