IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 11598 of 2008(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- C.K.JAYAPRAKASH, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, (RETD) OMKAR, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.T.R.JAGADEESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, P.W.DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, P.W.DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, SUB TREASURY, MANANTHAVADY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.115982008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE SANCTIONING OF REVISED PENSIONARY CLAIMS OF THE PETITIONER DT. 11.3.05. P2:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 19.11.07. P3:- COPY OF THE REPLY DT. 18.12.07. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11598 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 20th November, 2008. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Nandakumar, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. 2. The petitioner is a pensioner. He retired from service on 30.5.2002 on attaining the age of superannuation. After his retirement, the pensionary benefits were sanctioned. Later the pensionary benefits were revised by Ext.P1 order dated 11.3.2005. Following the revision of pension, though the Commuted Value of Pension was enhanced, the petitioner did not claim or receive it. However on the erroneous assumption that the petitioner had received the revised Commuted Value of Pension and was being paid the revised pension in full, recovery was initiated and the sum of Rs.14,300/= being the excess pension paid to the petitioner for the period from November-2006 to July-2007 was recovered. The petitioner was also paid only W.P.(C) No.11598/2008 2 reduced pension from August-2007 onwards. This writ petition was thereupon filed challenging the recovery and the reduction. The petitioner contends that as he had not drawn the revised Commuted Value of Pension, the recovery and reduction are illegal. 3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit contending inter alia that recovery was ordered and pension reduced, since the pension sanctioning authority, viz., the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (Administration) had accorded sanction for payment of revised Commuted Value of Pension to the petitioner. It is now conceded at the Bar that though revised Commuted Value of Pension was sanctioned to the petitioner by the pension sanctioning authority, the petitioner has not drawn the revised Commuted Value of pension. Such being the situation, the recovery effected from the pension paid to the petitioner and the reduction of pension were not called for. W.P.(C) No.11598/2008 3 In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to refund the sum of Rs.14,330/= recovered from the pension paid to the petitioner. Such repayment shall be effected within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The arrears of pension from August 2007 shall also be disbursed within the said period. It is further directed that the revised pension sanctioned as per Ext.P1 shall be paid to the petitioner without any recovery being effected from it. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.