IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2010 / 13TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24311 of 2010(L) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- P.ABDUL KARIM, (CHARGE MAN, KSRTC, NEYYATTINKARA DEPOT, RETIRED ON 31.3.2010), TC 49/202-2, SAJI MANZIL, KALLATTU NAGAR, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.K.P.RAJEEVAN RESPONDENT: ------------------- KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV.MR. V.V. NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR – SC FOR KSRTC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24311 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired as a Charge man from the Neyyattinkara Depot of the respondent-Corporation on 31.03.2010. The main grievance raised in the writ petition is regarding the delay in disbursal of the pensionary benefits including DCRG and commuted value of pension. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had availed a loan from the State Bank of Travancore, Manacaud Branch, Thiruvananthapuram and because of the financial difficulties, the petitioner could not repay the loan amount. Therefore, the Bank has initiated recovery steps against the petitioner. Exhibit P2 is the notice issued by the Bank to the petitioner. It is pointed out that the petitioner has also liabilities on account of the loan availed from different sources in connection with the marriage of his daughter which was solemnized on 08.12.2005. The petitioner approached the W.P.(C) No.24311/2010 2 respondent for getting the pensionary benefits but no action was taken by the respondent to disburse the amount. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition has been filed. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the guidelines issued by this Court in W.A.No.289/2001 even though directs disbursement of the retirement benefits on the basis of seniority, the same can be varied if ordered by this Court in appropriate cases. Herein, there is a genuine ground. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider the sanction of the benefits and disburse the amount after conducting due enquiry expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp