IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 29159 of 2007(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ G.SIVACHANDRAN NAIR MULAVANA THALACKAL VEEDU PALLICHAL, NEMOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (RETIRED MECHANIC, KSRTC, PARASSALA DEPOT) BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPALAKRISHNAN (SREEVALSAM) SRI.S.NARAYANAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- KSRTC REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29159 of 2007(U) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: SUSPENSION ORDER NO.VLC2-011362/2002 DTD. 10.06.2002. EXT.P2: ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL EXONERATING THE PETITIONER DTD. 26.6.2004. EXT.P3: ORDER DTD. 17.7.2006 OF THE RESPONDENT TREATING THE SUSPENSION PERIOD AS DUTY FOR PENSIONARY BENEFITS ONLY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29159 OF 2007 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 28th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P3 order. He is retired as Mechanic from KSRTC. While he was working at Pappanamcode depot, he was suspended from service as part of the disciplinary action on the alleged misconduct and dereliction of duty on charges of attempt to pilfer diesel from the said depot. Enquiry was conducted. The disciplinary authority imposed punishment of increment bar. Though an appeal was filed, it became unsuccessful. The matter was carried in revision before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal found that there is absolutely no legal evidence against the petitioner. Thereafter, Ext.P3 order is issued. By Ext.P3, the Managing Director has proceeded to treat the period of suspension of the petitioner as duty only for the purpose of pensionary benefits. It is ordered that he will not be entitled to the pay and allowances for the period under suspension. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned WPC.29159/07 : 2 : standing counsel. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, by Ext.P2 order, the Appellate Tribunal has categorically found that there is no evidence at all against the petitioner. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of pay and allowances for the period he was placed under suspension and it is not sufficient that the period is calculated for duty only for the purpose of pensionary benefits. I went through Ext.P2 order. A perusal of Ext.P2 would show that the Appellate Tribunal has considered the evidence and found that there is complete lack of evidence to prove the charges levelled against the petitioner. It is further stated that the case rests on suspicion and that suspicion how strong it may be, it cannot be substituted for proof or legal evidence. If that be so, I would think that it would be unjust and illegal if the petitioner is not given the benefits he would have received and the authority has, in my view, acted illegally in not granting the full benefits for the period he was under suspension. Accordingly, Ext.P3 is quashed and it is ordered that the petitioner will be entitled to pay the pay and allowances for the period he was placed under suspension. The WPC.29159/07 : 3 : said amount due to the petitioner as pay and allowances for the period he was placed under suspension less the subsistence allowance already paid to the petitioner will be disbursed to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE