IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2009 / 22ND POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 72 of 2009() ------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN RP.1285/2008 IN O.P.33400/2000 & THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.33400/2000 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- P.RAJAN, ASST.ENGINEER (RETD), SOUPARNIKA, B.C.ROAD, NEAR COMMUNITY HALL, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1.KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2.CHIEF ENGINEER, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, K.S.E.B., PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B., ELECTRICAL DIVISION, FEROOKE. 4.DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, K.S.E.B., TRANSMISSION CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV.SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, S.C., KSEB. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.72 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 12th January, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. Appellant/petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in disbursing the pensionary benefits. During the pendency of the writ petition, it has come out that the Board had initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in the matter of fixation of liability, alleging that owing to the conduct of the petitioner, the Board had sustained loss. It is seen from Ext.P5 that it is an order passed by the Deputy Chief Engineer, the first authority in the matter of disciplinary proceedings, wherein the petitioner was found to be liable for 40% of the loss caused to the Board. 2. Since the petitioner has an effective remedy by way of appeal, being the first order in a disciplinary proceedings, we do not think that this court should go into the legality or propriety of the proceedings. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Appeal without prejudice to his liberty to pursue the matter in appeal. Another contention raised is that owing to the alleged pendency of the proceedings, the undisputed portion of his pensionary benefits have been WA NO.72/09 2 unduly delayed and hence he is entitled to interest for the same. Whether the petitioner has contributed to the delay, and if not what should be the rate of interest to be given etc. are all matters for adjudication before appropriate forum. The petitioner is entitled to pursue that claim also, either before the appellate authority or before the civil court. In that view of the matter, the question of interest is left open. 3. In the result, the judgment under appeal and the order in the review petition are set aside and the Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. It is made clear that in the event of the petitioner approaching the appellate authority within one month from today, the appeal shall be disposed of with notice to the petitioner, within another three months. The undisputed amounts if not already disbursed shall be disbursed to the appellant forthwith. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. tgs WA NO.72/09 3 KURIAN JOSEPH & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.72 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 12th January, 2009.