Xavier Sixon P.M vs Kerala State Housing Board ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 21421 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
         FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                         W.P.(C) NO.20139 OF 2020
PETITIONER:

              XAVIER SIXON P.M.,
              AGED 61 YEARS,
              RETIRED EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSHB , S/O. MATHEW,
              PUTHENCHAKKALAKKAL,
              PADAMUKAL, SATELITE TOWNSHIP,
              VAZHAKALA VILLAGE, KAKKANAD,
              ERNAKULAM 682 030.

              BY ADVS.
              M.R.JAYALATHA
              SMT.K.VINAYA


RESPONDENTS:

     1        KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
              HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

     2        THE SECRETARY,
              KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD,
              SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

              BY ADV SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) NO.20139 OF 2020
                                  -2-

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner, after a long period of service with the 1 st

respondent, retired on 31.10.2015. The retirement benefits were

not paid initially due to the pendency of audit objections. According

to the petitioner, in 2015, the Senior Deputy Director of Kerala

State Audit Department verified and authorised the pensionary

benefits due to the petitioner. He claims that as of now, there is no

outstanding liability, the audit objections are cleared and still, the

DCRG, full pension and other pensionary benefits have not been

released to him.

2. When the matter was taken up, the learned counsel for

the respondents submitted that a sum of Rs.14,12,369/- was paid

on 08.10.2021. The receipt of the above amount is acknowledged

by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited

my attention to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents

wherein essentially the liability to pay has not been disputed. The

main objection seems to be that there are certain audit objections.

Having considered this, I am inclined to dispose of the writ

petition itself by directing that the 1 st respondent shall quantify the W.P.(C) NO.20139 OF 2020

entire amounts due to the petitioner subject to the audit objections

and inform the admissible amount payable to him, within a period

of one month and to pay the entire amount, as expeditiously as

possible, in accordance with the priority maintained by the 1 st

respondent. The writ petition is disposed of with the above

direction. In case of breach, the right of the petitioner to move this

Court for revival of the writ petition stands reserved. In case of any

dispute regarding the quantification, the petitioner would be

entitled to challenge it in accordance with law.

sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE bpr W.P.(C) NO.20139 OF 2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL ENGINEER KSHB, KOCHI DATED 30.10.2015.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER DATED 3/2016.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECRETARY K.S.H.B. DATED 15.3.2016.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY K.SH.B. DATED 8.9.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE INDIA POST.