Allowed

M.K.Raveendran v. Guruvayoor Devaswom

Kerala HC17 Oct 2012WP(C)/11702/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerned the reckoning of Non-Minority Person (NMR) service rendered by the petitioner towards qualifying service for pensionary benefits. The court allowed the petition by relying on a precedential judgment in W.P.(C) No. 11816 of 2011.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the judgment in W.P.(C) No. 11816 of 2011, allowing the claim for pensionary benefits.

M.K.Raveendran Vs Guruvayoor Devaswom — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/25TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 11702 of 2012 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M.K.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 59 YEARS (RETD. PEON, GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM), MATRAMKOTTU HOUSE KANDANISSERRI P.O., ARIYANNUR (VIA) TRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SMT.P.V.ASHA

SMT.VINEETHA B.

RESPONDENT(S):

GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR GURUVAYOOR.680 101.

¶12

ADMINISTRATOR

¶13

GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYOOR.680 101.

¶14

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LOCAL FUND AUDIT (GURUVAYOOR DEVASWOM) OFFICE OF THE LOCAL FUND AUDIT, DEVASWOM BUILDINGS

¶15

GURUVAYOOR.680 101.

¶16

R1&2 BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON R1&2 BY ADV. SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA R3- BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI P GOPAL

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 1710-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

APPENDIX(WP(C) 11702/2012)

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXTS.

¶21

EXT.P1	TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS REF.A7-1145/77(2) DATED 4.7.1979 OF R2.
EXT.P2	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE DATED 23.3.2012 FROM THE OFFICE OF 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 9.5.2007 OF 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4	TRUE COPY OF DECISION NO.46 IN THE MEETING DATED 26.9.2006 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5	TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION NO.170 IN THE MEETING DATED 25.2.2009 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.1.2012 IN WP(C) NO.11816 OF 2011.

lgk

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶26

W.P.(C). No. 11702 of 2012

¶27

Dated this the 17^th day of October, 2012

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶30

prayers:

¶31

“a. Declare that the NMR service rendered by petitioner for the period from 11.10.1977 to 30.6.1979 i.e till his regular appointment is liable to be reckoned towards qualifying service along with his regular service, for the purpose of pensionary benefits in the light of Ext.P4 and P5 decision and the judgment in W.P.(C) 4408/08, 11816/2011, etc;

¶32

b. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to grant the benefits due to the petitioner based on Ext.P4 and P5 decisions and to sanction the pensionary benefits due to him reckoning his NMR service from 11.10.1977 to 30.6.1979 towards qualifying service and to revise, refix, re-compute and disburse all the benefits due to him accordingly, along with arrears;”

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶34

issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court

¶35

W.P.C. No. 11702 of 2012 -2-

¶36

in W.P.(C).No.11816 dated 19.01.2012, which is produced as Ext.P6. The operative portion of the said verdict is extracted below:

¶37

“For the above reasons, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the service rendered by the petitioners as NMR workers during the period from 7/7/1979 to 31/3/1981 also as qualifying service for the purpose of computing the pension and other retirement benefits due to the petitioners. The pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioners shall be computed and appropriate orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.”

¶38

3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel as well.

¶39

After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that, the petitioner is also entitled to have the benefit of the above judgment. In the said circumstance, this writ petition is disposed of, in terms of the judgment cited supra.

¶40

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶41

Kp/-

M.K.Raveendran v. Guruvayoor Devaswom

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.K.Raveendran v. Guruvayoor Devaswom

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulaikha P.A. Vs State of Kerala

Surendran P.A Vs M/S. Iti Limited

Manager, Auzillium School, Varakkad, Vs State

Sivasankaran.P. Vs K. Chandran

Intelligence Officer(Ib) Vs B.a.Shanavas

C.Chandran Vs Assistant Security Commissioner