Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, having worked as a Physical Education Teacher in the fourth respondent school, retired from service on 31.3.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. When he was in service, from 27.2.2008 to 31.5.2009, the petitioner had been placed under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. Later, since the charges were not proved against the petitioner, he was reinstated through Ext.P3 proceedings. The grievance of the petitioner is that the period of suspension, that is, one year three W.P.(C)No.27306 OF 2014 : 2 :
months and three days has not been taken into account as part of his service for settling terminal benefits. Ventilating his grievance in that regard, the petitioner is said to have submitted Ext.P6 representation to the first respondent. Complaining of its non disposal, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously contended that once charges were held not proved against the petitioner and he has been reinstated in service, the entire period of suspension is deemed to have been reckoned as regular service and the authorities ought to have calculated the terminal benefits duly taking into account the said period of service, which according to the learned counsel, now stands excluded without any justification.
4. The learned Government Pleader has, however, submitted that since the petitioner had already submitted Ext.P6 representation, it may not be necessary at this juncture to have an adjudication of the matter on merits.
W.P.(C)No.27306 OF 2014 : 3 :
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, this Court, without adverting to the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation said to have been submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard in person to the fourth respondent as well as the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If desired, the petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the judgment before the first respondent.
jes DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE