High Court Kerala High Court

P.M.Subramanian vs The Kerala State Road Transport on 6 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
P.M.Subramanian vs The Kerala State Road Transport on 6 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 437 of 2011(D)


1. P.M.SUBRAMANIAN,PEENIKKAL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. K.S.NATESAN,KALARIKKALPARAMBIL HOUSE,
3. K.VIJAYAKUMARAN,KUTTIPAT HOUSE,
4. P.M.BALAKRISHNAN, PUTHETHU HOUSE,
5. M.F.BABY,MANGALAPPILLY, NEAR WATER
6. N.R.RAJAN,NADAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
7. M.N.VIJAYAN, MADASSERY HOUSE,
8. K.K.VALSAN,KODUVASSERIL HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF

3. THE PERSONNEL OFFICER(PENSION),

4. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

5. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

6. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

7. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

8. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

9. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.V.MILTON

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :06/01/2011

 O R D E R
                          C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
                   --------------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C). NO.437 OF 2011
                   --------------------------------------------

                  Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011


                                JUDGMENT

The petitioners are retirees from the Kerala State Road Transport

Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’). They retired from its service on

diverse dates. After their retirement, consequent to a bipartite settlement

between the Corporation and its employees, pensionery benefits were

revised with effect from 1.3.2006 subject to the condition that the

monetary benefits would be paid only with effect from 1.4.2009.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also

the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Admittedly,

the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered in favour of the

petitioners by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in

W.A.No.210/2010. It be so, the respondents are bound to re-fix the

pensionery benefits in respect of the petitioners and to disburse the arrears

with effect from 1.4.2009 in terms of the bipartite settlement referred

above. In view of the said position obtained in this case, the Writ Petition

is disposed of with the following directions:

W.P.(C) NO.437/2011 2

There will be a direction to the respondents to compute the revised

pensionery benefits payable to the petitioners with effect from 1.4.2009 in

terms of bipartite settlement dated 28.11.2008 and to disburse the arrears

consequent to such computation, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period

of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is

made clear that on failure on the part of the respondents to disburse the

arrears of pension in terms of the directions in this judgment, the amount

would carry simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 1.6.2009.

The respondents shall also continue to pay the petitioners pension at the

revised rate.

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

spc

W.P.(C) NO.437/2011 3

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

JUDGMENT

September, 2010

W.P.(C) NO.437/2011 4