Petitioner claimed arrears of pension due after his pension was revised. Respondent conceded the claim but sought additional gratuity details. Court held such details irrelevant and directed immediate payment.
Second respondent directed to disburse Rs. 60,965/- as arrears of pension within 4 weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932
WP(C).No. 15037 of 2010(D)
PETITIONER(S):
V.K.SIVARAMAN, AGED 68, S/O.KESAVA PANICKER, VADAKKEMUKKATHU, MADAMAN P.O., VADASSERYKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
BY STANDING COUNSEL FOR KSEB SRI.K.S. ANIL.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
W.P.(C) No.15037 of 2010
Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The claim of the petitioner is that consequent on
the revision of pension effected by Ext.P1, an amount of Rs.60,965/- is due to him towards arrears. Despite representations that has not been paid, and therefore, this writ petition.
Board, on instructions, concedes that amount as claimed by the petitioner is due. However, he only says that petitioner should furnish the particulars of the gratuity claimed by him from the Board, which according to him, is a requirement in terms of clause 8(1) of Ext.P1. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, though he has claimed gratuity by making an application before
the controlling authority, no order has been passed and no payment has been made. Considering the above facts of this case, I do not think that clause 8(1) of Ext.P1 has any relevance
in this case.
W.P.(C) No.15037 of 2010
2
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing
the second respondent to disburse an amount of Rs.60,965/-,
being the arrears of pension due to the petitioner. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of
4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition.
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE.
nj.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether arrears of pension claimed by the petitioner are due and payable despite a request for gratuity particulars.
V.K.Sivaraman
Kerala State Electricity Board
Executive Engineer
Antony Dominic
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
