IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24248 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.L.ANTONY, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE (RETIRED), CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, AYROOR P.O., VIA, KURUMASSERY, ERNAKULAM 683 579. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJESH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI. N. SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. -------------------------- W.P(C). No. 24248 OF 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 12th August, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner was promoted as Circle Inspector of Police by order passed on 23.8.1990. While he was serving as Circle Inspector of Police, he was granted first time bound higher grade, on completion of ten years of service. He was placed under suspension by order dated 6.9.1997. An enquiry into the charges was held and the punishment of compulsory retirement from service was imposed on him. The petitioner challenged the order imposing punishment in O.P. No: 4826 of 2002. The Original Petition was allowed and the order imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement was set aside. The State carried the matter in appeal. By Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 25.5.2005 in W.A. No: 1943 of 2003 a Division Bench of this Court upheld the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The petitioner had, in the meanwhile, attained the age of superannuation on 28.2.2003. Long thereafter, the Government, in implementation of Ext.P4 judgment issued Ext.P5 order dated 25.9.2006, cancelling the order of compulsory WPC 24248/08 2 retirement. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that notwithstanding Ext.P4 judgment and Ext.P5 order, he has not been given service benefits including the second and third time bound higher grade promotions. The petitioner also submits that the period of suspension and the period during which he was out of service have not been regularised. It is also submitted that his terminal benefits were fixed and paid ignoring his entitlement for the second and third time bound higher grade promotions. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P11 representation dated 2.4.2008 before the Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department setting out his grievances and claiming the said benefits. When this writ petition came up for admission today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the time being the petitioner is not pursuing reliefs (a) to (e) and that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P11 within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. I have heard Shri. T.R.Rajesh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. N. Sudha Devi, the learned Govt. Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. In the light of Ext.P4 judgment of this Court and Ext.P5 Order passed by the WPC 24248/08 3 Government, the claims raised by the petitioner in Ext.P11, merit consideration at the hands of the first respondent. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in Ext.P11 has not been considered till date. At least in the first instance a decision as regards the various claims raised by the petitioner in Ext.P11 have to be adjudicated upon and decided by the State Government. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 6.9.1997 and he attained the age of superannuation on 28.2.2003. In the interregnum the punishment of compulsory retirement was also imposed on him. That punishment was later set aside and the award of punishment now stands cancelled by Ext.P5 order. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice will be met if the grievances voiced by the petitioner in Ext.P11 are considered by the first respondent. 3. I therefore dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P11 and pass orders thereon, after notice to and affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard in person, within a period of three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition. After considering Ext.P11, if WPC 24248/08 4 it is found that the petitioner is entitled to monetary benefits, the same shall be disbursed to him without delay and in any case within a further period of two months from the date on which orders are passed on Ext.P11. The claims and contentions of the petitioner are left open and if he is aggrieved by the order passed on Ext.P11 it will be open to him to challenge the same in other appropriate proceedings. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE jj