D. CHRISTOPHER RAJ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges a decision of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal. He was a Senior Superintendent in the Scheduled Caste Development Department. In its pursuit to support persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Department brought out different Schemes, including for housing. A programme was brought up as the Golden Jubilee Celebration Housing Programme in Devikulam during the year 1998 -1999. Accusing that the petitioner is involved in forgery and falsification of accounts resulting in misappropriation of around Rs.34 lakhs during the financial years 2001 -02 and 2002 -03, two vigilance cases were registered against the petitioner. He was placed under suspension with effect from 15.05.2003. Later, he was re -admitted to duty without prejudice to proceedings in the vigilance cases. He has got the opportunity to retire from service on superannuation on 31.03.2006. He was paid only provisional pension. He moved the Tribunal seeking direction for release of other retiral benefits with interest. The establishment placed a statement before the Tribunal, stating, among other things, that there were 751 beneficiaries for the Scheme implemented in Pallivasal Grama Panchayat and the petitioner had recommended ineligible applicants as beneficiaries against the departmental circulars and norms. According to the establishment, the investigation revealed 129 bogus claims, and 89 charge sheets have already been submitted before the competent criminal court. The rest are under preparation. With this facts scenario, the learned Tribunal cannot be found fault with for having refused relief to the petitioner, more particularly, in view of Rule 3A(a) of Part -III of the Kerala Service Rules. On the face of such Rule, there cannot be any judicial order to compel payment of retiral benefits other than provisional pension. For support, see the judgment dated 24.06.2003 in W.A. No. 1217 of 2000 : State of Kerala v. Kuttan Pillai [2003(3) KLT Short Note 16].

(2.) FOR the aforesaid reasons, this original petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed in limine.