Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI MONDAY, THE3D DAY OF FEBRUARY201414TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 33916 of 2011 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- M.N.THANKAPPAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, MANALIL HOUSE, VELIYAMBUM POST, PULPALLY VIA, SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT, SECRETARY-UNDER SUSPENSION - THE PULPALLY SCHEDULED TRIBE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO. D1997 PULPALLY, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE PULPALLY SCHEDULED TRIBE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO.D1997 PULPALLY,PULPALLY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 579, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE PRESIDENT, THE PULPALLY SCHEDULED TRIBE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO.D1997 PULPALLY,PULPALLY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 579.
3. SRI.K.N.ABDUL BASHEER, ADVOCATE, KALPATTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT - PIN-673 121.
4. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
5. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - PIN-695 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN R4 & R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.FAZIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0302-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.33916/2011 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1- THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED196.2010 OF THE2D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2- THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED1911.2010 OF THE2D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3- THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AS AGAINST EXT-P2 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. EXHIBIT P4- THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED53.2011 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5- THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYDATED103.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AS AGAINST EXT-P4 MEMO OF CHARGES. EXHIBIT P6- THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED129.2011 ISSUED BY THE3D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7- THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED159.2010 REQUESTING THE2D RESPONDENT TO DISBURSE THE SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE DUE TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8- THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED310.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE2D RESPONDENT REQUESTING THE2D RESPONDENT TO DISBURSE THE SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE DUE TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 33916 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has come up before this Court for a direction to the 2nd respondent to disburse the subsistence allowance due to the petitioner for the period during which he was placed under suspension while he was in service under the 2nd respondent.
2. The petitioner was the Secretary of the 1st respondent Society. He was placed under suspension on 19.06.2010, which was followed by an enquiry. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was suspended from service as early as on 19.06.2010, the subsistence allowance due to the petitioner pertaining to the period of suspension was not disbursed to him till date. He has a further case that the requisite sanction from the 4th respondent for continuing the suspension of W.P.(C) No. 33916 of 2011 ..2.. the petitioner beyond the period of six months was not obtained by the 2nd respondent and; therefore, the continued suspension of the petitioner beyond the period of six months is also illegal.
3. The respondent State has filed a detailed counter, wherein it was pointed out that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner was for unauthorized absence from duty, grave dereliction of duty, deficit in stock, misappropriation of funds and grave indiscipline. According to them, the petitioner failed to keep and maintain books of accounts of the respondent Society properly. It is further alleged that the value of stock of 557 kilogram of the honey that comes to 50,130/- was also misappropriated by the petitioner as detected in the domestic enquiry report. The enquiry officer found that the petitioner was guilty of charges levelled against him and; ultimately, he was removed from service on 29.12.2011.
4. Arguments have been heard. W.P.(C) No. 33916 of 2011 ..3..
5. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has been placed under suspension from 19.06.2010 to 29.12.2011, the date on which he was dismissed from service. The employee under suspension or deemed to have been placed under suspension by an order of the appointing authority is entitled to the subsistence allowance. According to Rule 55 of KSR Part I, Chapter V A, for the first year of suspension, subsistence allowance of an amount equal to the leave salary, which the officer would have drawn had he been on leave on half pay on the date of his suspension and for any period subsequent thereto at three quarters of such amount, is payable. So, the petitioner is entitled to get subsistence allowance from the date of suspension to the date of dismissal, i.e., from 19.06.2010 to 29.12.2011. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to disburse subsistence allowance due to the petitioner within a period of three months from today, if not already paid. W.P.(C) No. 33916 of 2011 ..4.. As the petitioner has been dismissed from service, the question regarding the legality of suspension is not considered by this Court in this writ petition. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE bka/-