IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 242 of 2010()
1. K.S.LOOKOSE, KADUNKAL (HOUSE)
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE K.S.E.B. REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M.) K.S.E.B.
For Petitioner :SMT.P.K.RADHIKA
For Respondent :SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :03/09/2010
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
------------------------------------------------------------
W.A.NO:242 OF 2010 E
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd September, 2010.
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
The writ appeal is filed by the petitioner challenging judgment
of the learned Single Judge partly allowing writ petition and partly
rejecting it. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and
standing counsel appearing for the Electricity Board.
2. The dispute raised in the writ petition pertains to claim for
promotion as Senior Superintendent for which learned Single Judge
issued a direction to the Board to consider even though appellant is
retired from service. So far as the next issue is concerned it is only
the claim for pension which is seen granted by Ext.P4 on
28/1/2009. Appellant is granted only a minimum pension of
Rs.2,400/- reckoning his service as 14 years whereas, according to
him, his previous service in the Central and State Government
departments should also have been counted and so much so he was
entitled to pension reckoning his service at least as 20 years. In
this regard the ground on which the learned Single Judge declined
the benefit is that petitioner failed to apply for reckoning the
W.A.NO: 242/2010 2
previous period for the purpose of pension within one month from
Ext.R2(b) order dated 1/9/2005. However, the specific case of the
petitioner is that much before Ext.R2(b) was issued he has put up
the claim to consider his previous service in Government.
Petitioner’s claim was considered long back, whereas the Financial
Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer has declared eligibility for the
petitioner to treat the various periods he has served the
Government prior to joining Kerala State Electricity Board for the
purpose of pension, in 1992. The finding in Ext.P5 which is a
communication from the Financial Adviser of the Kerala State
Electricity Board to the Secretary is that for counting previous
service and for granting consequential pensionary benefits the
previous employer ought to have remitted Rs.4,189/-. Counsel for
the Board submitted that since this payment was not made, the
appellant’s previous service in Government cannot be counted. The
learned Single Judge has ignored Ext.P5, which in our view is
sufficient evidence to entitle the appellant to get pension reckoning
his prior service in Government. If contribution of Rs.4,189/- is not
paid by the previous employer, then at least appellant should have
been given an opportunity to pay the same for his entitlement to
get pension.
W.A.NO: 242/2010 3
3. Accordingly the writ appeal is allowed in part by directing
the Kerala State Electricity Board to revise appellant’s pension by
reckoning his previous service in Government in terms of Ext.P5
communication issued by the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts
Officer on 5/3/1992 till date of payment. Arrears of pension
should be granted within three months from appellant remitting the
amount and thereafter pension should be continuously paid
reckoning his past service in Government in terms of the advice of
the Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer of the Kerala State
Electricity Board. Since writ appeal is disposed of, the Board
should also consider appellant’s claim for promotion to the post of
Senior Superintendent in terms of directions issued by learned
Single Judge and if allowed, consequential arrears of pensionary
benefits should also be granted without delay.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj
W.A.NO: 242/2010 4
W.A.NO: 242/2010 5