Allowed

N.Premachandran Nair v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Kerala HC9 Feb 2012WP(C)/3305/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired tire retreaders moved the Court seeking higher grade and consequential benefits upon completing 25 years of service. The Court directed the respondent to dispose of the petitioners' representations within two months after affording them an opportunity of hearing. The petition was disposed of on 9-02-2012.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of representations submitted by petitioners within two months after hearing, in light of Ext.P2 judgment.

N.Premachandran Nair Vs Kerala State Road… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/20TH MAGHA 1933

¶5

WPC.No. 3305 of 2012 (K)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

N.PREMACHANDRAN NAIR RETIRED TYRE RETREADER, NEELKAMAL, PKRA -188 NEAR RAKSHAPURI CHURCH, PATTOM P.O, KESAVADASAPURAM TRIVANDRUM.

¶8

K.BABY

¶9

RETIRED TYRE RETREADER, TRA NO.36B, RAGHAVA VILASOM

¶10

TC 31/1144 (2) ,POOVATHOOR, THAZHASSERI

¶11

PETTAH, TRIVANDRUM 695 024.

¶12

M.K.NATARAJAN ACHARI,

¶13

RETIRED TYRE RETREADER, VINEESH BHAVAN

¶14

MAZHUKER MEAL, KALLISERY P.O, CHENGANOOR

¶15

ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.S. MOHAMMED AL RAFI

¶17

RESPONDENTS:

¶18

KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023.

¶19

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (A) KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023.

¶20

BY SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

WPC.No. 3305 of 2012 (K)

¶23

: 2 :

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 16.01.2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶27

EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.12.2010 IN W.P.(C) NO. 27882/07 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶28

EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02.01.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶29

EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02.01.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶30

EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02.01.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶31

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

B.P. RAY, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶37

W.P.(C) No. 3305 of 2012

¶38

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶39

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2012.

¶40

JUDGMENT

¶41

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶42

The petitioners have filed this writ petition with the

¶43

following prayers:

¶44

Issue a writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature or order or direction commanding the respondents to grant higher grade and to disburse consequential benefits to the petitioners on account of their completion of 25 years of service forthwith.

¶45

Issue a writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature or order or direction commanding 1^st respondent to consider Exts.P3 to P5 representations and to pass appropriate orders sanctioning higher grade on completion of 25 years of service and disbursing the consequential benefits to the petitioners forthwith.

¶46

The petitioners are the retired employees of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. All of them have rendered more than 25 years of service. They have retired from service without getting any promotion. By Ext.P1 order dated 16.01.2007, the 1^st respondent has granted higher grade to 7 classes of persons on completion of 25 years. Being aggrieved by the denial of grade promotion to the petitioners, this writ petition has been filed.

¶47

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶48

similarly situated persons have been given benefits based on

¶49

W.P.(C) No. 3305/2012 : 2:

¶50

Ext.P2 judgment. The petitioners submitted Ext.P3 to P5 representations before the 1^st respondent.

¶51

In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to dispose of Exts.P3 to P5 representations submitted by the petitioners in the light of Ext.P2 judgment, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

¶52

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶53

sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.

¶54

¶55

W.P.(C) No. 3305/2012

¶56

: 3:

¶57

B.P. RAY, J.

¶58

O.P.No. 13887 of 2002

¶59

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2012.

¶60

JUDGMENT

¶61

W.P.(C) No. 3305/2012 : 4:

N.Premachandran Nair v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Premachandran Nair v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

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

Vasanthi Vs the District Collector & Others

K.Natarajan Assary Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Dhaneshkumar Vs State of Kerala

O.A. Sebastian Vs Asst.Exe.Engineer, Kseb

Jayakumar.M. Vs Deputy Tahsildar (R.R)

K.Premachandran Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation