IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 31436 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.O. ULAHANNAN, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT (RETIRED), TALUK OFFICE, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KANJIRAPPALLIL HOUSE, KADAPPATTOORE.P.O, PALA - 686 575. BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.S.RAJ MOHAN SMT.J.DEEPTHI ROSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, MUSEUM JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. THE ACCOUTNANT GENERAL (A&E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 039. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKATH FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. True copy of the report No.G10/6454/03 SB dated 1.4.2004. Ext.P2. True copy of the Order dated 10.8.2005. Ext.P3. True copy of the order dated 20.2.2006. Ext.P4. True copy of the letter No.A1-4220/06 dated 31.5.2006. Ext.P5. True copy of the pension payment order dated 2.1.2009. // true copy // P.S to Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.31436 OF 2009(Y) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner retired as Village Officer from KDH Village on 31.5.2006. Though DCRG due to him has been sanctioned by Ext.P5 the same has not been disbursed, apparently due to the pendency of the disciplinary action that has been initiated against him. Irrespective of the pendency of the disciplinary action or otherwise, having regard to the expiry of three year period prescribed in in Note 3 Part III KSR and since no liability has been fixed against him, the DCRG due to the petitioner has to be disbursed. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent to ensure that the DCRG due to the petitioner shall be disbursed within 2 months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. It is clarified that this judgment will not stand in the way of respondents recovering any loss, if any, caused to them in accordance with law. It is also clarified that this court will not stand in the way of the petitioner in challenging the validity of the disciplinary action, if any, initiated. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. /09 :2 :