IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 29208 of 2005(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.M.LATHEEF, SENIOR ASSISTANT (RTD), CHANDUKANPARAMBIL, ERATTUPPETTA 2. BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN DAVIS RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. K.S.E.BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VYDYUTHI BAHVAN, PATTOM, THIRUANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PALA. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, K.S.E.B,. PALA. 4. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, PENSION AUDIT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER(HRM), VYDYUTHI BAHVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R1TO4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29208 of 2005(B) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - REPLY DATED 31/12/2003 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO R3. EXT.P2 - ORDER DATED 17/01/2004 PASSED BY R3. EXT.P3 - APPEAL DATED 10/03/2004 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2. EXT.P4 - ORDER DATED 10/06/2004 PASSED BY R2. EXT.P5 - NON LIABILITY CERTIFICATE DATED 19/2/2004 ISSUED BY K.S.E.B. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6 - ORDER OF R4 FIXING THE PENSION OF PETITIONER. EXT.P7 - PETITION DTD.29/06/2004 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE K.S.E.B. EXT.P8 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 6/10/2004 IN W.P.(C)NO. 26347/04. EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 20/10/2004 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P10 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/7/2005 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs KURIAN JOSEPH, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.29208 OF 2005 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him culminating in the imposition of punishment and the consequential orders on appeal and review. Petitioner retired from service on 28.02.2001. 2. It is seen that enquiry was completed only on 31.05.2003. As per the report of enquiry, Exhibit P2 order was passed by the Executive Engineer wherein it is held that since the petitioner has retired from service, the monitory value equivalent to three increments drawn by him could be recovered with cumulative effect. I am afraid, the appointing authority has not properly understood the law on the point. After retirement, disciplinary proceedings can be continued; there is no quarrel. But such continuance is only for the purpose of assessing loss if any caused and for recovering the said loss from the incumbent concerned. 3. The imposition of punishment of three increments after retirement and recovery of monitory value of those increments in W.P.(C) No.29208/05 2 view of retirement is impermissible under law. It is seen that an amount of Rs.13,132/- has been recovered from the petitioner by way of excess payment during the period 4/90 to 12/97 due to wrong fixation. It is also to be seen that petitioner was in service upto 2001 and there was no recovery. Even after three years also, there is no recovery. Therefore, recovery of such amounts paid during a period of four years prior to retirement is impermissible under Rule 3 Part III of Kerala Service Rules. Therefore, recovery made under those two heads is impermissible. 4. As far as the revised pension is concerned, it is seen that the matter has already been considered by this Court leading to Exhibit P8 judgment in W.P.(C) No.26374/2004. Paragraph 4 of the said judgment reads of follows: “However, with regard to refixation of pension there is no justification in not refixing the pension at the revised rate. Petitioner retired on 28.02.2001. Since the computation is in terms of the revised rate, there cannot obviously be any dispute for the entitlement of the petitioner. Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondents to refix the pension at the revised rate of pay from the date of retirement of the petitioner. This shall be done within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The eligible W.P.(C) No.29208/05 3 benefits including arrears shall be disbursed within a period of one month thereafter”. The judgment has become final. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to pension also at the revised rate. The impugned orders are quashed with a direction to respondents to disburse the withheld amounts referred to above and also refix the pension at the revised rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment. In the event of delay beyond three months, petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 12% and the officers responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. This writ petition is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. smp W.P.(C) No.29208/05 4 KURIAN JOSEPH, J. W.P.(C) No. 29208 OF 2005 J U D G M E N T 28.08.2008