M.ABDUL JABBAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with the grievance that, the benefits flowing from Ext.P2 judgment have not been fully extended to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner was working as an Assistant Accountant in the 3rd respondent College and retired from service on 30.06.2004. While in service as above, he was proceeded against in respect of some misconduct and was kept out of service pending enquiry. Later, he came to be reinstated and the management passed Ext.P1 order, whereby the period spent by the petitioner outside was ordered to be treated as 'on duty'. It was in the above circumstance, that the petitioner approached this Court by filing O.P.No.19382/2001, which culminated in Ext.P2 judgment, whereby the petitioner was declared as eligible to obtain salary and such other allowances for the period from 30.6.1984 to 4.3.1997, based on Ext.P1.

(3.) THE second respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit regarding compliance of the verdict, also producing copies of the relevant bills counter-signed by the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education for the period from 30.6.1984 to 4.3.1997. It is stated that, the said payment to an extent of Rs.3,43,106.00(Rupees three lakhs forty three thousand one hundred and six only) has already been received by the petitioner. It is also added in paragraph'5' that, claim in respect of the 'earned leave surrender', the necessary proceedings had to be forwarded by the Manager with regard to the actuals and that, no such proceedings or request was never made by the authorities. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents 3 and 4 pointing out the sequence of events, contending that, by virtue of the order passed by the Management and also the verdict passed by this Court, the petitioner was not ordered to be given all the benefits which otherwise could have been made available to him, had he be continued in service and that the period in which he was kept out of service has been treated as 'on duty'. The following benefits were released to the petitioner as stated in paragraph '3', which is extracted below: