Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

S.SYED MUHAMMED versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


S.SYED MUHAMMED v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS - WP(C) No. 18897 of 2007(Y) [2007] RD-KL 11491 (28 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 18897 of 2007(Y)

1. S.SYED MUHAMMED,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION (J)

3. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION,

4. THANGAL KUNJU MUSALIAR COLLEGE OF

For Petitioner :SRI.N.L.KRISHNAMOORTHY

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

Dated :28/06/2007

O R D E R

A.K. BASHEER, J.

W.P.(C). NO. 18897 OF 2007

Dated this the 28th day of June, 2007



J U D G M E N T

Petitioner had availed of leave without allowance while he was working as a Steno typist in an aided college under the Directorate of Technical Education, Thiruvananthapuram, from January 1, 1977 to December 31, 1981. According to the petitioner, he had rejoined duty after expiry of his leave on January 1, 1982. Shortly thereafter, he had gone abroad again to resume his duties there, after filing another application for leave without allowance. Petitioner was under the bonafide belief that his second application for leave would be allowed. But, it appears that respondent No.2 did not choose to do so, with the result, the petitioner was treated as an unauthorised absentee. Proceedings were initiated against him and he was dismissed from service. After a few years he came back to the country and applied for compassionate allowance.

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the Government has taken a decision against him on the application, as though it was WPC NO.18897/07 Page numbers a request for pension. More importantly, the order was passed by respondent No.2 without affording any opportunity to the petitioner to be heard. A perusal of Ext.P9 order, which is impugned in this writ petition, does not show whether the petitioner was heard or not. In the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that it will be only fair if the petitioner is afforded an opportunity to be heard by the Government. To that extent alone petitioner is entitled to succeed. Therefore, Ext.P9 is quashed. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider and pass orders on the application submitted by the petitioner for compassionate allowance strictly on its merit and in accordance with law after affording him an opportunity to be heard. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE

vps WPC NO.18897/07 Page numbers

A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE

OP NO.20954/00 WPC NO.18897/07 Page numbers

JUDGMENT

1ST MARCH, 2007


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.