IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 35970 of 2003(F)
1. C.K.NARAYANAN,(ASST.ENGINEER,(RTD)
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER(HRM)
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.BOSE
For Respondent :SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :26/06/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------
W.P.(C.) No.35970 of 2003
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner joined the service of the Kerala State Electricity
Board on 19/02/1980. On attaining the age of superannuation, he
retired from the service on 31/01/2003. Prior to joining the KSEB,
he had rendered service under the Central Public Works Department
for the period from 10/09/1966 to 18/02/1980. On retirement
from the KSEB, pensionary benefits were granted to the petitioner.
Ext.P5 is the pension payment order, which was sanctioned on
22/07/2003, and the pension payment is to commence from
01/02/2003.
2. However, while, reckoning his pensionary benefits, the
period of services rendered by the petitioner under the Central
Public Works Department was not reckoned. The petitioner
represented the matter before the authorities. However, his claim
was not accepted, and it is therefore, this writ petition is filed
praying to quash Ext.P5 to the extent his services for the period
WP(C) No.35970/2003
-2-
from 01/09/1966 to 18/02/1980 is not reckoned for the purpose
of pensionary benefits. The petitioner also seeks consequential
reliefs.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed, and the reason stated
for excluding the aforesaid period, contained in paragraph 4 of the
counter reads as under:-
“4. It is submitted that the petitioner’s prior service in Central
Public Works Department can be reckoned for pensionary benefits
only if the petitioner’s former employer remits the proportionate
liability to the Respondent Board as laid down in G.O.(P)
369/87/Fin dated 31/03/1987 as adopted by the Board in
B.O.Estt.IV/16033/87 dated 25/07/1989.”
Therefore, the only question is whether the previous employer is
liable to discharge the pro-rata pension liability, in terms of the
Government Order dated 31/03/1987 referred to in paragraph 4 of
the counter affidavit. G.O.(P) 367/87/Fin dated 31/03/1987 reads
as under:-
“G.O.(P) 367/87/Fin. Dated, Trivandrum, 31st March, 1987
Abstract.- Simplification of adjustments on account of
allocation – of Leave Salary and Pension between Central and
State Governments – Orders Issued.
Read:- 1. Office Memorandum No.14(5)86/TA/1029
dated 09/10/1986 of the Government of India, Ministry of
Finance Department of Government of Expenditure, New Delhi.
WP(C) No.35970/2003
-3-
2. Letter No.Co-or.III/12-2/152/964 dated
09/01/1987 from the Accountant General, Kerala, Trivandrum.
O r d e r
In the Office Memorandum cited first Government of India
have in consultation with the State Governments decided to
dispense with the system of allocation of leave salary and
pension between Central and State Government and among
Departments of the various State Governments. The Accountant
General in his letter cited has requested to issue reciprocal
orders. Government after consideration, reiterate the decision of
the Government of India dispensing with the system of allocation
of leave salary and pension between Central and State
Governments as specified below, for compliance by all
concerned.
(a) Leave Salary.- The existing system of allocation or
sharing of the liability on account of Leave Salary Contributions
by Central Government to State Government or vice versa will be
dispensed with. The liability for leave salary will be borne in full
by the Department from which the Government servant proceeds
on leave whether it be his parent Department or a borrowing
Department with whom he is on deputation.
(b) Pension.- The liability for pension including gratuity
will be borne in full by the Central / State Department to which
the Government Servant permanently belongs at the time of
retirement. No recovery of proportionate pension will be made
from Central/State Government under whom he had served.
(c) Contributory Provident Fund.- The liability for
Government contributions will be borne by the parent
Department of the Central or State Government and no share of
contributions will be received from any borrowing Department.
The above provisions are extended to the exchange of
officers between two State Governments.
WP(C) No.35970/2003
-4-
These orders will take effect from 01/04/1987 and apply
to all cases of leave salaries and pensions sanctioned on or after
that date.”
4. A reading of this order shows that by this order, the
Government have dispensed with the system of sharing pension
liability and it is specifically provided that no recovery of
proportionate pension will be made from Central / State
Government under whom the pensioner had served before joining
the service. In the light of the clear wordings of the Government
Order dated 31/07/1987, which was adopted by the Board on
25/07/1989, there is no warrant for the stand it has taken in the
counter affidavit that the Central PWD is liable to discharge is pro-
rata liability.
5. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing, the
learned counsel for the respondent Board placed reliance on
Government Order No.G.O.(P) 703/2002/Fin. dated 12/11/2002,
which provided for remittance of prorata contribution by the
previous employer. However, it is also reported that the said
Government Order was adopted by the Board only from
03/09/2003. As already stated, the petitioner’s retirement was on
31/01/2003, and Ext.P5, the pension payment order was issued on
WP(C) No.35970/2003
-5-
22/07/2003, and the pension has to be paid from 01/02/2003.
The pension of a retired employee is to be settled from the month
next to his retirement and the Government Order dated
12/11/2002 adopted by the Board on 03/09/2003 could not have
retrospective application affecting the pensionary entitlement of the
petitioner. That apart, the respondents have no case in the counter
affidavit filed that it was because of the terms of the Government
Order dated 12/11/2002, which was adopted on 03/09/2003, that
the prior service rendered by the petitioner was not reckoned for
want of the previous employer not discharging the pro-rata
contribution.
6. For these reasons, I am not satisfied that the period
10/09/1966 to 18/02/1980 was excluded for any justifiable
reason. Accordingly, Ext.P5 to the extent it has not reckoned the
aforesaid period will stand set aside, and the respondents are
directed to re-work the pensionary benefits of the petitioner taking
into account the aforesaid period also and release the benefits
within three months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg