M.P. KURIAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN C.M.P. No. 4181/91 came up for orders, I heard Counsel appearing on either side in detail. I am disposing of the Original Petition.

(2.) PETITIONER was compulsorily retired under Rule 60A of Part I K.S.R. by order, dated 5th September 1975. Finally the Respondent revoked the order and reinstated him in service by order, dated 6th December 1977. On 25th October 1978 Government issued orders regarding the regularisation of the period of absence of persons like the Petitioner who were compulsorily retired and subsequently reinstated in service. As per that, those officers who retired before the issue of orders of revocation of the compulsory retirement would be given full pay and allowances. In the case of officers like the Petitioner who continued in service were not given any pay and allowance. The period of their absence was ordered to be regularised by granting leave without allowance. That order was challenged in O.P. No. 710/78. The impugned Government order was quashed by this Court. State took up the matter in appeal, W.A. 64/80. The Division Bench directed the Government to re -examine the entire issue afresh. Petitioner filed O.P. 329/79 challenging the very same order. That petition was disposed of in the light of the observation made by the Division Bench in W.A. 64/80. After reconsideration, Respondent passed Ext. P -4 order, dated 17th March 1982 on the same terms as the order on 24th October 1978. Petitioner challenged Ext. P -4 in O.P. 7357/82. Before the disposal of that O.P. Ext. P -4 was quashed in O.P. 4012/82. Thereafter Respondent passed another order, dated 3rd March 1984 reiterating the stand that the service between the date of compulsory retirement and reinstatement would be treated only as leave without allowance. That order, dated 3rd March 1984 is marked as Ext. P -5 in the case. That order, was also quashed in O.P. 7357/82. The Respondent was again directed to consider the Petitioner's case with reference to Rule 56 of the Kerala Service Rules. Government have now passed Ext. P -7 order, dated 22nd December 1989 declining the request of the Petitioner for arrears of salary for the period during which he was illegally kept out of service. On 29th January 1990 this Court passed the following order in C.M.P. No. 1183/90.

(3.) THOUGH notice on this petition was accepted by the Respondent way back in February 1990, no counter -affidavit has been filed. One Sri K. Raja Raja Varma, a person who was compulsorily retired like the Petitioner herein and who was reinstated subsequently, approached this Court for getting the salary for the period during which he was illegally kept out of service by moving O.P. 5252/86. While disposing of that O.P. by judgment, dated 22nd August 1990, a learned Single Judge of this Court observed: