Partly allowed

Secretary to Government of India v. D.Thankamma

Kerala HC1 Sept 2014WA/814/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged a direction ordering the Central Government to disburse pension benefits within three months. The High Court modified the direction, directing the Government to consider the State Government's recommendation and take a decision without being influenced by the lower court's prior observation.

What did the court decide?

The direction for immediate disbursement was modified; the Central Government is directed to consider the State Government's recommendation and take a decision within two months.

Secretary to Government of India Vs D.Thankamma — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/10TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

WA.No. 814 of 2014 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 19061/2005 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 21-11-2011

¶7

APPELLANT / 1ST RESPONDENT :

¶8

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (FREEDOM FIGHTER'S DIVISION SOUTH ZONE) NEW DELHI - 110 003.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC

¶10

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT :

¶11

1. D.THANKAMMA W/O.LATE VASUDEVAN PILLAI, USHA BHAVAN, MATTAM NORTH THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA,

¶12

ALAPPUZHA-690 103.

¶13

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA 688 001.

¶14

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.K.K.SATHEESH

¶15

SRI.R.RAMADAS

¶16

R2 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. GIRIJA GOPAL

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

...2/-

¶20

WA.No. 814 of 2014 ()

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES : NIL

¶23

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES :

¶24

ANNEXURE R1(a) : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8-10-2012 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CONT. CASE NO. 1322/2012 IN WP(C) NO. 19061/2005. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn

¶25

Ashok Bhushan, Ag. C.J & A.M. Shaffique, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.A. No. 814 of 2014

¶26

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 1^st day of September, 2014.

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

Ashok Bhushan, Ag. C.J.

¶29

Heard counsel for the parties.

¶30

The appeal has been filed against the judgment passed in W.P(C) No. 19061/2005. The petitioner, widow of late Vasudevan Pillai, applied to the Central Government for grant of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension. The Central Government did not sanction pension since the application was not in proper form. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgment, has observed that if the application is submitted before the authorities concerned in proper form within three weeks, the same shall be forwarded to the Central Government within one month from the date of receipt of application. The appellant is aggrieved by that observation in the order to the following effect:

¶31

“The Central Government shall accord approval to the same and disburse the pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of recommendation from the State Government.”

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that without there being consideration of the entire material including

¶33

W.A. No. 814 of 2014 -: 2 :-

¶34

the report of the State Government, no direction can be issued by the learned Single Judge to disburse pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that the disbursement shall be made depending upon other factors, which are to be ascertained.

¶35

We have considered the submissions of the parties.

¶36

The learned Single Judge directed the petitioner to submit an application, which was to be forwarded by the State Government to the Central Government along with the recommendation. We are of the view that the decision of the State Government was to be taken after considering all relevant facts. We feel that the direction issued by the learned Single Judge to accord approval and disburse the pensionary benefits could not have been issued at that stage.

¶37

We modify the said direction to the extent that the Central Government shall consider the application and recommendation of the State Government and take a decision thereafter without being influenced by any of the observation made by the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 21^st November, 2011.

¶38

Learned counsel for the appellant submits

¶39

W.A. No. 814 of 2014 -: 3 :-

¶40

that as and when the recommendation of the State Government is received, a decision can be taken within two months thereafter.

¶41

With the aforesaid direction, the writ appeal is disposed of.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

Ashok Bhushan, Ag. Chief Justice

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

A.M. Shaffique, Judge. Tds/

¶46

(True copy)

¶47

P.S to Judge.

Secretary to Government of India v. D.Thankamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Secretary to Government of India v. D.Thankamma

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

Ishwara R Ali Vs P.M.Abbashaji

Manager Vs P.P.Ramesan

Anil Kumar Vs the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Thiruvananthapuram

Anwar Hussain Vs Kamalobhavan

Aruna Unnikrishnan Vs N.Kamalolbhavan

K.Priyadarsanan Vs State of Kerala