Susamma N J vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 1874 Ker

WP(C) NO. 5517 OF 2022            1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
                 TH
   FRIDAY, THE 18   DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 29TH MAGHA, 1943

                    WP(C) NO. 5517 OF 2022

PETITIONER/S:

          SUSAMMA N J,
          AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.PHILIP,
          ARASARKADAVIL HOUSE, MARARIKKULAM NORTH P.O.,
          VIA SL PURAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 549.

          BY ADVS.
          LINDONS C.DAVIS
          E.U.DHANYA
          SWATHY A.P.



RESPONDENT/S:



    1     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER
          EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

    2     DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
          6TH FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033.

    3     DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,
          ERNAKULAM, GENERAL HOSPITAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM 682 011.
 WP(C) NO. 5517 OF 2022            2


    4     THE MANAGER, ST.MICHAEL'S COLLEGE, MAYITHARA P.O.,
          CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 539.



          SMT SURYA BINOY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 5517 OF 2022                       3


                                      JUDGMENT

While working as a Last Grade Servant in the St.Micheal's College,

Cherthala, the petitioner herein was removed from service on 18.01.2001. The

said order was challenged before this Court and by judgment dated 24.03.2009

in O.P.No.8318 of 2001, this Court converted the punishment to compulsory

retirement from 18.01.2001. The said judgment has become final.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner as well as her

husband are finding it difficult to make both ends meet. In the said

circumstances, she submitted Exhibit-P3 application invoking Rule 5 of Part III

of the KSR. Exhibits-P4 to P7 Medical Records are produced before this Court

to contend that the Health Condition of the petitioner is precarious. The

petitioner contends that this Court in Ragavan V.N. v. State of Kerala and

others [2012 (1) KLT 923] had occasion to hold that the entitlement of an

employee, who is dismissed or removed from service for Compassionate

Allowance is within the discretion of the Government. The prayer in this writ

petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on

Exhibit-P3 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as

well as the Manager of the institution.

3. Learned Senior Government Pleader on instructions submitted that

the Authority, who is competent to consider the request of the petitioner would

be the Authority, who is competent to remove the petitioner from service.

According to the learned Government Pleader, the petitioner was removed from

service by the Management, the 4th respondent herein.

4. In response, Sri.Lindons C. Davis, the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submitted that though the competent authority is the

Management, the pension is to be sanctioned by the Government. The learned

counsel submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the request made by

the petitioner is considered with due notice to the Management as well.

5. I have heard Sri.Lindons C. Davis, the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner and Smt.Surya Binoy, the learned Senior Government Pleader.

6. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ

petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and

circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at

the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider

and take appropriate decision on Ext.P3, as per procedure

and strictly in adherence to the provisions of law, after

affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or

virtually, to the petitioner herein or her authorised

representative as well as the 4th respondent.

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in

any event, within a period of two months from the date of

production of a copy of this judgment.

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the

writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned

respondent for further action.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

DSV

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5517/2022

PETITIONER (S) EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-03-2009 IN OP NO. 8318/2001.

Exhibit P2 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07-02-2017 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25-01-2022.

Exhibit P4 A COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 03-10-2018 OF DEPARTMENT OF CARDIOLOGY IN GENERAL HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM.

Exhibit P5 A COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 21-01-2019 OF DEPARTMENT OF CARDIOLOGY IN GENERAL HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM.

Exhibit P6 A COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 26-01-2019 OF DEPARTMENT OF CARDIOLOGY IN GENERAL HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM.

Exhibit P7 A COPY OF THE MRI REPORT DATED 20-01-2019 OF GENERAL HOSPITAL ERNAKULAM.

RESPONDENT (S) EXHIBITS: NIL