AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner is working as a Professor and Head of the Department of Radio Therapy in the Medical Education Services. The petitioner would have retired from service on superannuation on 31.5.2009, but for the extension of the retirement age. On such extension, the date of retirement of the petitioner was 30.4.2010. On 12.10.2009, the petitioner submitted an application for voluntary retirement from service with effect from 31.12.2009. That application was rejected by the Government as per Ext.P1 order dated 25.11.2009. The age of retirement was extended to 60 years and, therefore, the date of retirement of the petitioner would be 31.5.2014. In these circumstances, on 9.4.2010, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 application for voluntary retirement from service. He also submitted Ext.P3 reminder dated 21.6.2010. The petitioner contended that by efflux of time, it shall be deemed that the petitioner had retired from service with effect from 15.7.2010, by operation of Rule 56(iv) of Part III of the Kerala Service Rules. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 22.7.2010 pointing out the above aspects. Exts.P2 to P4 have not been disposed of so far.
The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:
(i) Declare that the petitioner has retired from service with effect from 15.7.2010 pursuant to his Ext.P2 application for voluntary retirement from service, in terms of Rule 56(iv) Part III, Kerala Service Rules.
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to relieve the petitioner from service with effect from 15.7.2010 on retirement from service with effect from the said date, or in the alternative,
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Exhibits P2 and P4 representations forthwith.
(iv) Allow cost of the petition to the petitioner.
(v) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon''ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
The petitioner relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Venugopal v. State of Kerala and Ors. ILR 2010 Ker 867.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, for the time being, the petitioner confines his relief to the alternative relief (iii). The request of the petitioner is just and reasonable.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application dated 9.4.2010 and Ext.P4 representation dated 22.7.2010 submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.