Quashed

Chief Secretary to Government v. P.Kochuneelakantan

Kerala HC12 Jan 2016WP(C)/15085/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the Upa Lok Ayukta's order directing enhanced medical allowances to a contingent employee, holding that the benefits applied only to regular pensioners. The Government Order was clarified to apply prospectively to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P3 order set aside; GO(P) No. 3001/98/Fin. benefits applicable prospectively to the petitioner from date of interim order.

Chief Secretary to Government Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/22ND POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 15085 of 2004 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SPL.GOVT.PLEADER SRI P V LONAPPAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

P. KOCHUNEELAKANTAN, KUTTAPOIKA VEEDU, POONGODU, CHADAYAMANGALAM.

¶11

KERALA UPA LOK AYUKTA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, VIKAS BHAVAN THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33.

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WPC NO.15085/2004

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

¶16

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF the SAID COMPLAINT NO. 767/2003

¶17

EXT.P1(a): TRUE COPY OF the RELEVANT PORTION OF THE G.O (P) NO. 3001/98/FIN. DT 25.11.1998

¶18

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA

¶19

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT 22.03.2004

¶20

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF the GO(P) NO.348/2004/146/FIN. DATED 31.07.2004

¶21

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY'

P.A TO JUDGE

jma

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 15085 of 2004

¶27

¶28

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner State is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order

¶31

passed in a complaint filed by a contingent employee. The Upa Lok Ayukta considered a complaint by the contingent employee for payment of medical allowances at the rate of Rs.50/- per month as per Clause 17 of G.O(P) No.3001/98/Fin. Dated 25.11.1998. The Lok Ayukta negatived the contention of the State that the G.O applied only to regular Government employees who were pensioners and not to contingent employees. It was directed that

¶32

the enhanced medical allowance at the rate of Rs.50/-per month is to be paid to the complainant with effect from 25.11.1998, the date of the order.

¶33

In the writ petition the order was stayed, but,

¶34

however, the Government was directed to consider whether the

¶35

WPC.No.15085/2004

¶36

: 2 :

¶37

contingent employees also could be extended the benefits by interim order dated 01.06.2004. The Government considered the same and has granted such benefits from 01.06.2004. In such circumstance, the finding of the Lok Ayukta that the contingent employees would also be entitled to medical allowance as per the G.O dated 25.11.1998 cannot be sustained. Further the Lok Ayukta

¶38

could not have issued such direction as declared by a Division Bench in the decision reported in 2002(3) KLT 254 (State of Kerala v. Bernard). Ext.P3 would stand set aside. But, however, the benefit of the G.O, as per the interim order of this Court dated, 01.06.2004 would be applicable to the petitioner also prospectively to the issuance of the G.O.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶40

Sd/(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

¶41

jma

¶42

//true copy//

¶43

P.A to Judge

Chief Secretary to Government v. P.Kochuneelakantan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chief Secretary to Government v. P.Kochuneelakantan

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

N.v.Lal Vs Smt. Vasumathy

T.V Sasidharan Nair Vs v. Ratheesh

P.N.Gopi Vs State of Kerala

Raveendran P.S. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Usha Louis L Vs the State of Kerala

Ajith S Vs State of Kerala