IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 2645 of 2007()
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.R.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :05/12/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ.
--------------------------------------
W.A.No.2645 of 2007
-------------------------------------
Dated 5th December, 2008
JUDGMENT
Koshy,J.
The writ petitioner is an ex-serviceman. He joined the State
Water Transport Department as a provisional hand in the post of Fitter,
Grade II on 26.9.1976. He was selected for provisional appointment
based on the sponsoring made by the Employment Exchange.
Candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange were considered
and it was found that petitioner was fully qualified and fit to be appointed
in the post of Fitter, Grade-II in the Water Transport Department and he
was appointed with effect from 269.1976. He attained the age of
superannuation on 31.10.1996. He continued in service till 31.10.1996.
He had more than 20 years of service. His claim for regularisation was
not accepted. His case is that taking into account his service he may be
granted at least provisional ex-gratia pension. Learned Judge found that
ex-gratia pension was meant for regular employees who could not draw
pension because of the dearth of qualifying service. But, similarly placed
provisional employees in the department were granted benefit of ex-
gratia pension by Ext.P7 judgment of a learned single Judge of this court
in O.P.No.19571 of 2002 and no appeal was filed against the same. It is
also noticed that those petitioners had 15 years of service. Here, the
W.A.2645/2007 2
petitioner had completed more than 20 years of service. He was an
ex-serviceman. He was fully qualified. He has undergone a process
of selection from the list of candidates sent by the Employment
Exchange. He worked in the permanent post though not regularised.
If he were purely a provisional employee, as per Rule 9(a)(1) of the
Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, his services could have
been terminated before completing six months of service. That was
not done. Water Transport Department has used his service as a
regular Fitter though his services were not formally regularised. It is
true that merely because no appeal is filed from the judgment in
O.P.No.19571 of 2002, that will not estop the Government from
contesting an appropriate case. Since the petitioner had worked as
Fitter in the Water Transport Department for more than two decades
and he joined the same after a process of selection, we are of the
opinion that ex-gratia pension cannot be denied to him. On the facts
of this case, we are of the opinion that no interference is required in
the impugned judgment.
The appeal is dismissed.
J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE
THOMAS P. JOSEPH
JUDGE
tks