P R RAVEENDRAN NAIR S/O A P GOVINDA Vs. STATE OF KERALA; DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS; DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION; SECRETARY OF MUNICIPALITY PALA; SECRETARY OF MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the petitioner, while working as Provisional Municipal Commissioner in the office of the 4th respondent, he retired from service on voluntary retirement, with effect from 31.12.1988. It is his case that by Ext.P1, gratuity of Rs.31,515/- was sanctioned by the 3rd respondent. It is stated that initially an amount of Rs.64,345/- was indicated as his liability and that by Ext.P2, the 2nd respondent has intimated the 5th respondent to reduce the petitioner's liability to Rs.5,200/- and issue a revised LC/NLC in order to enable the petitioner to receive the balance amount of DCRG from the 4th respondent. Complaint of the petitioner is that despite several requests that he made to the 5th respondent, so far revised LC/NLC has not been issued in pursuance to Ext.P2.

(2.) There is no counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent.

(3.) None has a case that Ext.P2 is no longer in force. If that be the case, necessarily the 5th respondent has to issue revised LC/NLC in pursuance to Ext.P2. This apparently was the only reason for delay in the disbursement of DCRG by the 4th respondent. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions.