JOSEPH K.J. Vs. DIRECTOR OF TREASURES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER retired as Senior Accountant on 30th June 1987.petitioner,while working as Junior Accountant,Sub Treasury,Muvattupuzha,was placed under suspension as per order No.B5 -2406/77,dated 13th September 1977 since he was arrested by police in connection with a complaint of making certain false entries in the tax licence register,etc.Charges levelled against him were punishable under S.420,468 and 477A read with S.109 of the Indian Penal Code.The department issued to the petitioner a memo of charges dated 13th September 1977 alleging that he has committed irregularities during the period from 18th June 1975 to 27th August 1977,and the petitioner was required to show cause,if any,as to why disciplinary action as contemplated under the Kerala Civil Services(Classification,Control and Appeal)Rules,1960 should not be taken against him.Petitioner submitted a detailed statement of defence dated 30th September 1977 denying the charges,petitioner was later charge sheeted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court,Muvattupuzha,and the case was taken on file and numbered as C.C.No.140 of 1980.After a detailed examination,the trial court found that the petitioner was not guilty of any charges levelled against him and acquitted him under S.248(1)of the Cr.P.C There was an appeal against the said judgment as Crl.A.No.169 of 1982.which ended in dismissal.When,the petitioner was acquitted by the order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court orders dated 5th July 1984 were issued for reinstatement of the petitioner.In the said Order,it was stated that the regularisation of the period of suspension will be considered at the time of the disposal of the disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner.Later the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him was finalised as per proceedings dated 19th June 1987.In the disciplinary proceedings petitioner was found guilty.It was found that a sum of Rs.5.240 was recoverable from the petitioner.However,since the petitioner was about to retire on 30th June 1987.and he was under suspension for seven years,he was let off without inflicting any either punishments. It was ordered to treat the period of his suspension with effect from 14th September 1977 to 31st July 1984 as leave to which he is eligible and that the subsistence allowance,if any,paid to him in excess of the admissible leave salary for the period will be recovered from him.Against the said proceedings dated 29th June 1987.petitioner preferred appeal.Appeal petition was however rejected by the Government by Ext.P -9 order dated 28th April 1988.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the same,petitioner filed O.P.No.4238 of 1988 challenging Exts.P -8 and P -9 orders.Original Petition was allowed by Ext.p -10 judgment setting aside Exts.P -8 and P -9 orders.It is stated that the said judgment has become final.Petitioner then submitted various representations to the Director of Treasuries as well as other authorities.He was served with Ext.P -12 communication stating that further action on his 'representation will be taken after getting orders from the Government,Another communication was also received by the petitioner,vide Ext.'P -14,on the same line.However,no action has been taken by the respondents.Petitioner submitted another representation Ext.P -15.He also sent another representation on 8th October 1994 to which he received Ext.P -18 wherein it was stated that the matter is still pending before the Government Since no action has been taken by the respondents,petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give grade promotion in the scale of Rs.950 -1640 with effect from 16th September 1985 and to grant him arrears of Day and also to fix his pension on the basis of the pay he would have drawn in that scale.He also sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to treat 'the period of suspension from 14th September 1977 to 1st August 1984 as duty for all purposes and to disburse the arrears of pay and allowances taking into account annual increments and pay fixation in.respect of pay revisions and promotions to which he would have been otherwise entitled,deducting the subsistence allowance already drawn by him with 18 per cent Interest.He also prayed for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to commute his pension In terms of Pension(Commutation)Rules with interest.

(3.) RESPONDENTS have filed a statement,wherein they have stated that the Government have issued G.O.( Ms.) No.404/95/Pin .,dated 23rd June 1995 regularising the period of suspension -It is stated that copy of the order has been sent to the District Treasury Officer Muvattupuzha,the pension sanctioning authority for settling the retirement benefits of the petitioner.It was stated that the delay in sanctioning the retirement benefits due to the petitioner was not deliberate.