UTHAMAN Vs. DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner retired from the service of the 2nd respondent on 28.02.2010. THE petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that, his retirement benefits have not been disbursed yet. THE petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:

(2.) THE standing counsel for the Municipality on instructions submits that, there are two reasons for the delay in disbursal of the retirement benefits. First is that, the pension papers forwarded to the Local Fund Audit Department have been returned for rectifying the defects therein which is being sorted out and the defects would be cured and the papers would be re-forwarded shortly. THE 2nd is that the Municipality is facing acute financial crisis and therefore they are unable to disburse retirement benefits of retired employees in time. I am of opinion that, both reasons are unconvincing. When an employee retires it is the duty of the Municipality to see that the pension papers are processed in accordance with law and the retirement benefits paid to the employee expeditiously. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents including the 1st respondent to see that the retirement benefits due to the petitioner is paid to him by the 2nd respondent as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.