Allowed

Chacko v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Oct 2009WP(C)/28132/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court heard a writ petition challenging orders revising the petitioner's pay and pension benefits after retirement. The Court upheld the re-fixation of pay but restrained recovery of amounts and directed the Government to consider a representation for possible exemption.

What did the court decide?

Restraint on recovery of pension amounts up to the date of judgment; liberty to file representation for exemption from re-fixation by Rule 7 of Part I KSR.

Chacko Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28132 of 2009(J) --------------------------

¶4

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶5

CHACKO.J., AGED 67, S/O.JACOB, NADUKKUDY HOUSE, AIRAPURAM P.O., KEEZHILLAM, PERUMBAVUR, ERNAKULAM.

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.J.ABHILASH

¶7

RESPONDENT(S):

¶8

¶9

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL SECRETARY TO GOVT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), OFFICE OF ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA.

¶12

ACCOUNTS OFFICER, SUB TREASURY, PERUMBAVOOR.

¶13

SR GP ANU SIVARAMAN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 28132 of 2009

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ACCOUNT GENERAL ON 31.8.09

(TRUE COPY)

P.A TO JUDGE

V.GIRI, J

W.P.(C).28132/2009

Dated this the 8^th day of October, 2009

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Petitioner retired from service as a 1^st Grade Surveyor. While in service, petitioner was granted a time bound higher grade on completion of 20 years of service and apparently he was fitted in the scale of pay which was then applicable to the post of Technical Assistant/Superintendent. Consequently further benefit of pay revision orders was also afforded to him and his pension and retirement benefits were computed accordingly.

¶26

While so, more than eight years after his retirement, orders have now been passed revising the petitioner's pay apparently holding that the fixation of his pay on the grant of 3^rd time bound higher grade, in the scale of pay applicable to a Superintendent is illegal. Thus, the terminal surrender benefits are also directed to be revised and Ext.P1 directs recovery of pension and other benefits for the period subsequent to 7.3.2002. Consequential orders have been passed under Ext.P2 which have been challenged in the writ petition.

¶27

W.P.(C).28132/09

¶28

¶29

I have considered a similar issue in a batch of cases in W.P.(C).590/2009 and Connected Case and I have issued he following directions in the said cases.

¶30

(i).The petitioners, who were not qualified to be appointed to the post of Technical Assistant, coming within the purview of the Special Rules for Kerala State (Survey and Land Records), were not entitled to be granted third time bound higher grade in the scale of pay applicable to that of a Technical Assistant, on completion of 25 years of service.

¶31

(ii).The petitioners were entitled to third time bound higher grade on completion of 25 years of service in the scale of pay immediately above the scale of pay as fixed in the revised orders, which is in consonance with Clause 3(b)(vii) of G.O.(P) No.930/93.

¶32

(iii).The revision of the scale of pay and consequent revision of the pension being drawn by the petitioners as effected in the orders impugned in the present cases are upheld, subject to the directions issued hereunder:

¶33

W.P.(C).28132/09

¶34

¶35

(a).The respondents are restrained from effecting recovery of any amounts, consequent upon the impugned refixation of pay and revision of pension, effected in the case of these petitioners till and inclusive of the date of this judgment.

¶36

(b).The revision of pension consequent upon the re-fixation of the pay that has been effected in all these cases is permissible in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Service Rules.

¶37

(c).The petitioners, in each one of these cases, may file a representation before the Government within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, invoking Rule 7 of Part I of the KSR, and request the Government to exempt them from the re-fixation of pay and consequent revision of their pension and also to see that the pension originally fixed in each of their cases is diluted and continued.

¶38

(d).The Government shall consider the representations filed by the petitioners sympathetically and in the light of the observations contained in this judgment on humanitarian consideration and take a decision as early as possible.

¶39

W.P.(C).28132/09

¶40

¶41

(e).It is made clear that the Government will be entitled to see that they may, indicate, if they decide to accept the case of the petitioners, that the Government need not be treated as a precedent in any other case.

¶42

(f).The interim order in each one of these cases will continue to operate, till a decision is taken by the Government on the representations filed by the petitioners as aforementioned.

¶43

(g).But, it is made clear that recovery for the period, subsequent to the date of this judgment, will abide by the decision to be taken by the Government as aforementioned.

¶44

It is declared that the same directions would be applicable in the case of the petitioner also. Thus while upholding the re-fixation, it is made clear that there shall not be any recovery of the amounts disbursed to the petitioner by way of terminal benefits pursuant to Ext.P2. If the petitioner files a representation before the Government in the manner permitted in the aforementioned judgment, then, his representation shall also be considered by the Government, and fresh orders shall be passed within the same time frame

¶45

W.P.(C).28132/09

¶46

¶47

as has been mentioned in the aforementioned judgment and the other directions issued therein will be treated as applicable to the petitioner also.

¶48

V.GIRI, Judge

¶49

mrcs

Chacko v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chacko v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.K.Kunjumon Vs J.Ansar

State of Kerala & Another Vs R.Babu & Others

K.C. Shajan Vs State of Kerala and Others

K.v.Kunhirama Marar Vs the Commissioner

C.M.Latheef Vs Kseb

V.Manikuttan Vs Asst.Devaswom Commissioner