Kerala High Court
Dr. Josephkutty Jacob vs Cochin University Of Science And ... on 13 May, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:33730
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 23RD VAISAKHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 40963 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
DR. JOSEPHKUTTY JACOB
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O K.CHACO, OVELIL HOUSE,
PERUMPANACHI P.O, CHANGANASERRY,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686536
BY ADVS.
SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE
SRI. P.A.REJIMON
SMT. NIKITA NAIR C.S.
SRI. VIVEKJOS PUTHUKULANGARA
SMT. MAHIMA MERINE REJI
SRI. SAJEEV JOHN T.
RESPONDENTS:
1 COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
KALAMASERRY, CUSAT P.O,
KOCHI, PIN - 682022
2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
KALAMASERRY, CUSAT P.O,
KOCHI, PIN - 682022
2025:KER:33730
W.P.(C) No.40963/2024
:2:
3 THE REGISTRAR
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
KALAMASERRY, CUSAT P.O,
KOCHI, PIN - 682022
BY ADV.
SRI.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 20.03.2025 AND THE COURT ON 13.05.2025
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:33730
W.P.(C) No.40963/2024
:3:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.40963 of 2024
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 13th day of May, 2025
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
The petitioner states that he retired from the
service of CUSAT as Principal of their Engineering College at
Kuttanad. While working as Associate Professor in Charge of
Principal, the University initiated disciplinary proceedings
against the petitioner and was placed him under suspension.
By Ext.P4, this Court set aside the order of the University
imposing punishment on the petitioner with a direction to
reconsider the issue of treating the period of suspension of
the petitioner. Consequently, the University issued Ext.P5
withdrawing the minor penalty of Censure imposed on the
2025:KER:33730
petitioner and the period of suspension was ordered to be
treated as duty.
2. The petitioner states that during the period
of suspension from 27.12.2012 to 04.10.2013, only 50% of
salary was given to the petitioner. Annual increments were
declined to the petitioner. The petitioner therefore seeks to
direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 12% per
annum for the salary arrears of the petitioner for
₹36,87,181/-.
3. The respondents filed counter affidavit. The
respondents submitted that the petitioner was placed under
suspension as per Ext.P1 order dated 28.12.2012. The
petitioner remained under suspension till his reinstatement in
service on 04.10.2013. A minor penalty of Censure was
imposed on 17.12.2016. The suspension period was treated
as eligible leave.
2025:KER:33730
4. This Court, by Ext.P4 judgment dated
09.06.2022 quashed the disciplinary proceedings but with a
direction to reconsider the manner in which period of
suspension is to be regulated. Pursuant to the said direction,
order was passed treating the period of suspension as duty.
There is no willful default on the part of the respondents.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the
respondents.
6. The writ petition has been filed for payment
of interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the salary arrears
of the petitioner for ₹36,87,181/-. Relying on the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dua v. State of Haryana [2008 (3)
KLT 58 (SC)], the petitioner contends that even in absence of
statutory rules, administrative instructions or guidelines, an
employee can claim interest for delayed disbursal of terminal
benefits.
2025:KER:33730
7. It is to be noted that the writ petition has
been filed solely for the purpose of payment of interest. The
claim therefore is of monetary dispute. A writ petition is not
maintainable for claiming interest alone. The petitioner may
have to resort to other legal remedies for that purpose. The
petitioner was imposed with a penalty while he was in
service. The delay in payment of terminal benefits was as a
consequence of the disciplinary proceedings.
8. The respondents would submit that the
University had decided to treat the suspension as eligible
leave on 13.02.2017. The petitioner did not take any steps to
get it regularised submitting necessary proposals. The
petitioner did not challenge denial of increments also
promptly. The writ petition was filed only on 18.11.2024.
Considering the fact that the writ petition has been
filed solely for payment of interest which is a monetary
dispute, I am not inclined to grant relief to the petitioner in this
2025:KER:33730
writ petition. The writ petition is therefore dismissed leaving
open other remedies if any available to the petitioner.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/09.05.2025
2025:KER:33730
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40963/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO: AD
F1/CUCEK/MISC/2009 (PF) DATED 28-12-
2012 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CUSAT
Exhibit P-2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT OF
FIXATION OF PAY UNDER THE AICTE-2016
SCHEME OF THE PETITIONER DATED 18-08-
Exhibit P-3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE STATEMENT OF
FIXATION OF PAY UNDER THE AICTE-2016
SCHEME OF THE PETITIONER DATED 27-11-
Exhibit P-4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
09-06-2022 IN W.P (C) NO: 2444/2021 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT
Exhibit P-5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO: CUSAT/AD
(F).SO/4948/2022 DATED 04-11-2022
ISSUED BY CUSAT
Exhibit P-6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 19-04-
2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P-7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO: AD.
F1/18391/99 DATED 19-06-2023 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO: AD.
F1/18391/99 DATED 05-08-2024 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
2025:KER:33730
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION
OF PAY NO.FIN V/F/AICTE/PR
2016/1532/2021 DATED 22.11.2022 ISSUED
BY THE UNIVERSITY.
