IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 RP.No. 957 of 2003(Y) --------------------- [THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.21626/2003 DATED 01/10/2003] .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C): ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K P I P DIVISION NO.I, KANHIRAPPUZHA, POST KANHIRAPPUZHA. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, K P I P DIVISION NO.I, KANHIRAPPUZHA, POST. KANHIRAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P. NANDAKUMAR. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C): -------------------------------------------------------- MUHAMMED KUTTY, S/O. ALAVI, MATTUMMAL HOUSE, MUTHUKKURUSSI, (POST), PICHALAMUNDA, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, (WORKING AS SLR WORKER, 4/3 SECTION K P I P DIVISION, KANHIRAPUZHA – NOW UNDER SUSPENSION). BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No.957 of 2003 in W.P.(C)No. 21626 of 2003 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010 O R D E R This review petition is filed by the State seeking review of the judgment dated 01.10.2003 in the writ petition which reads as follows: “Petitioner was suspended from service as per Ext.P1 dated 9.5.2002. Petitioner has two grievances. (1) He is not paid subsistence allowance. (2) He has filed Ext.P5 appeal before the Chief Engineer and the same is not considered so far. 2. There will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P5 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The respondents will see that the petitioner is paid his subsistence allowance in accordance with law during the period he was under suspension. Appropriate action in this regard will be taken by the concerned officer within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of the judgment along with copy of the writ petition. Delay in payment of the subsistence allowance will attract interest at the rate of 12% per annum and the officer responsible for the delay will be personally liable for the interest . Writ petition is disposed of as above.” The present contention of the State is that, as an SLR worker the respondents cannot seek subsistence allowance insofar as the question of suspending an SLR worker does R.P. No.957 of 2003 in W.P.(C)No. 21626 of 2003 -2- not arise. I am of opinion that, that is a matter which should be considered in the writ petition. Accordingly I allow the review petition, recall the judgment dated 01.10.2003 and restore the writ petition to file. Post the writ petition for hearing. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/