IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.DENESAN MONDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2007 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1929 WP(C).No. 33975 of 2006(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- P.V.KURIAKOSE, HEALTH INSPECTOR GR-II (RETD.), ATTUPURATH HOUSE, PADINJARAKKARA P.O., VALLAKOM, VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.T.R.SADEESAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI, BOAT JETTY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY, VAIKOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM for R4 SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY for R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.NANDAKUMAR for R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.NO.33975/2006 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF ORDER NO.P2/15383/04 DTD. 6/02/06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER NO.P2-13383/04 DTD. 15/03/06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 2/08/06. EXT.P4: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 2/08/06. /TRUE COPY/ KSS K.K.DENESAN, J. ----------------------------- WP(C)No. 33975 OF 2006 ----------------------------- Dated this the 26th March, 2007. JUDGMENT The petitioner retired from service while working as Health Inspector Gr.II. The Municipality where he had worked last is the fourth respondent. The grievance of the petitioner relates to delay in granting him revised pensionary benefits. It is seen that he has submitted Ext.P4 representation addressed to the Secretary of the fourth respondent for computing the amount due to him by way of revision and to take appropriate action. 2. In the nature of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner, it is necessary that the fourth respondent considers Ext.P4 and if it is found that the petitioner is eligible for revised pensionary benefits, the amount due to him is worked out and due request is made to the second respondent, for necessary sanction. Needless to state that on the second respondent according sanction, the petitioner shall be given the benefit of the revised pensionary benefits if found entitled. The entire exercise shall be completed by respondents 2 and 4 within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. WPC 33975/2006 2 Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. K.K.DENESAN Judge jj