IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14222 of 2009(W)
1. K.V.PUSHPA, W/O.LATE O.A.RAGHAVAN,
... Petitioner
2. K.P.ANNIE, W/O.LATE T.L.VARKEY,
3. T.K.ROSA, W/O.LATE C.P.OUSEPH,
4. M.R.VILASINI,
5. P.G.USHA, W/O.LATE C.K.SURENDRADAS,
6. K.M.ROSILY, W/O.LATE K.L.VAREED,
7. K.K.PANKAJAKSHI, W/O.LATE V.A.NAKULAN,
8. K.SAROJA, W/O.LATE C.RAMACHANDRAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :25/05/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.14222 of 2009
--------------------------------------
Dated 25th May, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are the wives of ex-police personnel, who
retired from service on 31.12.1994, 30.9.1996, 31.7.1998, 25.8.1998,
28.2.1999, 30.6.2000, 30.6.2001 and 31.5.1996 respectively.
2. The petitioners’ husbands were initially recruited to the
III Battalion of the Malabar Special Police. After the Malabar Special
Police was disbanded, they were absorbed in the Central Reserve
Police Force. After they completed their tenure in the Central Reserve
Police Force, they were absorbed in the State Police and while in
service in the State Police, they retired from service on the dates
mentioned above. They passed away on 3.9.1997, 6.5.2002,
6.8.2004, 7.7.2001, 27.4.2003, 18.2.2004, 13.9.2002 and 28.7.2002
respectively.
3. In this Writ Petition, the petitioners claim, relying on
Ext.P1 judgment of this Court and Exts.P2 and P3 Government orders
and Ext.P4 order issued by the Director General of Police that the
service rendered by their husbands in the III Battalion of the Malabar
Special Police and in the Central Reserve Police Force should be
reckoned for the purpose of service benefits including pay and
WP(C).No.14222/2009 2
allowances, promotions and pensionary benefits. They submit that in
the light of the authoritative pronouncement of this Court in Ext.P1
judgment their husbands are entitled to get similar treatment as they
are similarly placed as the petitioners in the Original Petition which was
disposed of by Ext.P1. The petitioners state that they have submitted
Ext.P5 representation before the Director General of Police seeking the
said relief. In Ext.P5, they have also referred to and relied on the
direction issued by this Court in W.P.(C)No.28917 of 2007 to consider
a similar request.
4. I have heard Sri.B.Raghunathan, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. It is brought to
my notice that besides the direction issued in W.P.(C)No.28917 of
2007, this Court had as per judgment delivered on 13-11-2007 in W.P.
(C)No.33276 of 2007 considered an identical request from similarly
placed persons and disposed of the said Writ Petition with a direction
to the Director General of Police to consider the request made by the
petitioners in their representations and pass orders thereon in the light
of Ext.P1 judgment, Exts.P2 and P3 Government orders and Ext.P4
order passed by the Director General of Police himself.
WP(C).No.14222/2009 3
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either
side, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners herein are also
entitled to similar reliefs in the matter. In the result, this Writ Petition
is disposed of in the following terms:
i) The second respondent shall consider Ext.P5 as also the
details furnished by the petitioners in the Writ Petition filed by them
and take an appropriate decision thereon, in the light of Ext.P1
judgment, Exts.P2 and P3 Government orders and Ext.P4 order
passed by himself.
(ii) If the petitioners’ husbands are found to be similarly
situate, appropriate action shall be taken to see that a similar
treatment is meted out to them.
(iii) The entire process shall be completed within a period
of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment along with a copy of this writ petition from the petitioners.
P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge
TKS