V.P.Rajappan Pillai vs The Kerala State Electricity … on 27 January, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20836 of 2007(E)


1. V.P.RAJAPPAN PILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM),

3. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (PENSION SANCTION),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.SASINDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :27/01/2009

 O R D E R
                T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J.
                      -------------------------
                  W.P ( C) No.20836 of 2007
                      --------------------------
              Dated this the 27th January,2009

                        J U D G M E N T

This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to

the respondents to grant grade promotion and enhanced

rate of pension reckoning petitioner’s military service

towards his civil pension from K.S.E.B. According to the

petitioner, he had in his credit a total embodied service of

two years and 85 days under the Territorial Army.

Petitioner seeks for a direction to the KSEB as noted

above to revise the pensionary benefits after counting the

earlier service under the Territorial Army.

2. Learned standing counsel for the respondents

pointed out that for the very same reliefs, the petitioner

had approached this Court earlier by filing O.P No.15329

of 1998 and the original petition was dismissed. The

relevant portion of the judgment is extracted below.

“The relief sought for in the Original
Petition is that the service rendered by the
petitioner in Territorial Army, prior to joining
the Electricity Board should be counted as

W.P ( C) No.20836 of 2007
2

military service for the purpose of grade
promotion and pensionary benefits. But in view
of Rule 2 (9A) of Part I of the Kerala State and
Subordinate Services Rules service in the
Territorial Army cannot be reckoned as military
service. Therefore, the Original Petition is
devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly
dismissed”.

Since the relief sought for in this writ petition stands

rejected by the earlier judgment of this Court, the writ

petition is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that the said judgment will not bind

the petitioner in view of subsequent communications.

When there is a clear finding in the earlier judgment, on

the same claim, against the petitioner which has become

final, a second writ petition cannot be entertained. Hence

the same is dismissed.

(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No.20836 of 2007
3

W.P ( C) No.20836 of 2007
4