Alexander Thomas, J.

1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 3.4.2008 rendered by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C).No. 33503/2004, whereby the Kerala State Electricity Board was directed to disburse the DCRG (Death Cum Retirement Gratuity) due to the petitioner within one month, the appellant-Kerala State Electricity Board has instituted this intracourt appeal.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows: The writ petitioner was in the service of the appellant-State Electricity Board. While working as Assistant Engineer at Kottarakkara, the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau of the Vigilance Department of the Government of Kerala had registered a crime as VC No.2/2001/ALP on 20.4.2001 under Sections 7 and 13 (2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging that the petitioner had demanded a bribe of Rs. 1,000/-. Pursuant to the registration of this crime, he was suspended from service on 21.4.2001 and thereafter, he was reinstated in service by Ext.P1 order dated 30.2.2002 issued by the appellant-Electricity Board. The petitioner thereafter retired from the service of the Board on superannuation on 31.3.2003. By Ext.P2 dated 1.4.2003 issued by the Transmission Construction Division, Edappal, the Deputy Chief Engineer concerned has been informed that there is no liability outstanding against the petitioner during his incumbency period under that station. By Ext.P3 proceedings dated 2.9.2003, the appellant-Electricity Board has admitted provisional pension with effect from 1.4.2003 and an amount of Rs.2,53,407/-has been authorised as commuted value of pension and further his DCRG amount has been withheld for want of final LPC (Last Pay Certificate) and NLC (Non Liability Certificate). It is further submitted by the petitioner that as per Ext.P7 proceedings dated 29.6.2005, the Chief Engineer of the Electricity Board has directed the Deputy Chief Engineer concerned that the matter should be vigorously pursued so as to get the vigilance enquiry finalised and the NLC issued, as expeditiously as possible so that withheld DCRG can be released etc. Alleging that no disciplinary proceedings or any other memo in that regard has been initiated and that his DCRG amount has been unlawfully withheld by the Electricity Board, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the aforementioned Writ Petition (Civil) seeking the prayers of mandamus to direct the Electricity Board to disburse the DCRG along with 18% interest and other incidental reliefs.

3. The learned Single Judge held in the impugned judgment rendered on 3.4.2008 that in view of the statutory provisions contained in the Notes 2 and 3under Rule 3 Part III KSR (Kerala Service Rules), the DCRG amount could be withheld only for the purpose of finalisation of liabilities as envisaged in that provision and that pendency of the judicial proceedings cannot be taken as a ground for withholding the DCRG beyond the maximum prescribed period of three years. As the petitioner had retired from service on 31.3.2003, the aforementioned three year outer time limit had expired as early as on 31.3.2006 and hence the learned Single Judge allowed the prayers of the Writ Petitioner by directing in the impugned judgment that the 1st respondent therein viz., Kerala State Electricity Board, shall disburse the DCRG due to the petitioner within one month. It is this judgment, that is impugned in the present Writ Appeal.

4. Sri. Raju Joseph, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant-Board submitted during the course of hearing of this appeal that after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment, the writ petitioner was convicted for the aforementioned offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act by the competent criminal court on 29.8.2009 and that Criminal Appeal No.1890/2009, filed against judgment of the court below, is said to be pending. The main contention urged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Board is that tho