IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 8852 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.R.SASIDHARAN, S/O.RAMAN, ELANJIMUTTAM, KARUKACHAL PO,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETAFRY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUANTANT GENERAL, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, COMMISSIONERATE OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAVERLI BHAVAN, KOCHI. ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO FOR R3, 4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH FOR R1, 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 8852 of 2010 F ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as Assistant Taluk Supply Officer in the Civil Supplies Department. Earlier, he was deputed to the Civil Supplies Corporation. While continuing there, alleging shortage in remittance, he was placed under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings. Later, he was repatriated to the parent department and as per Ext.P2 order, he was reinstated. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the fact that he is due to retire from service on superannuation on 31- 03-2010 and he was reinstated as per Ext.P2, no orders to regularise the period between the date of suspension and the date of reinstatement, in terms of Rule 56B of Part I of KSR, have been passed by the authority who reinstated the petitioner. According to the petitioner, further delay on the part of the authority in this issue would cause undue delay in the matter of disbursement of retiral benefits. The petitioner is having yet another grievance as well. He has already completed 24 years of service in the Civil Supplies WPC.8852/2010 : 2 : Department and, therefore, according to him, he is entitled to the 3rd Time Bound Higher Grade promotion on completion of 23 years of service. The said aspect was also not taken into consideration by the respondents on account of the pendency of the said disciplinary proceedings. 2. Indisputably, the petitioner who was placed under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings was reinstated as per Ext.P2. In Ext.P2, there is no indication as to how the period between the order of suspension and the order of reinstatement has to be reckoned. Rule 56B of Part I KSR enjoins a duty on the authority competent, who orders reinstatement, to pass an order in that respect. Therefore, without going into the merits of this writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the aforesaid aspects and pass orders in terms of the provisions under Rule 56B, expeditiously. In view of the fact that the petitioner is due to retire on 31-03-2010, the said authority shall pass such order as contemplated under the relevant provisions as mentioned above, expeditiously. It is true that any WPC.8852/2010 : 3 : delay in this matter would affect the quantification and disbursement of his retiral benefits. Therefore, the 3rd respondent shall pass orders in terms of the directions in this writ petition, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As noticed hereinbefore, the question of entitlement of the petitioner for the 3rd Time Bound Higher Grade on completion of 23 years also requires consideration by the 3rd respondent. To enable the 3rd respondent to consider the aforesaid aspects, the petitioner may submit a detailed representation explaining all the aforesaid aspects. In case the 3rd respondent receives such a representation from the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, the 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders thereon within one month after passing orders under Rule 56B. Sd/- (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge