IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3295 of 2009(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- APPUKUTTY, S/O. CHATHUKUTTY, AGED 57 YEARS, ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (RTD), JAS NIVAS, GREEN VALLEY, PUTHEN VAYAL, KALPATTA. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, O/O. THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, TRIVANDRUM 3. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KANNUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P. NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO: 3295 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner retired from service on 30.4.2007, as Assistant Labour Officer. The main relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 representation. By Ext.P5, he was informed by the second respondent that till the completion of the proceedings of the vigilance case, he is not eligible to draw the retirement benefits except provisional pension. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner entitled for the disbursement of commuted value of pension, in the light of the fact that by Ext.P2 the said benefit was granted in favour of one Mr.N.G.Sreedharan, who is also an accused in the vigilance case. He has filed Ext.P6 representation before the first respondent through proper channel. It is pointed out therein that the petitioner's co-accused in the vigilance case Sri.N.G.Sreedharan retired from service on 31.01.2008, and he was sanctioned the commuted value of 40% pension and various other benefits which were ratified by the Accountant General also. Therefore, the petitioner seeks a similar treatment. wpc:3295 of 2009 2 In that view of the matter, the first respondent will consider Ext.P6 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps