Allowed

Thiyancheri Gopalan Nambiar v. Union of India

Kerala HC7 Nov 2017WP(C)/15671/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought pension under the Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1980 for retired Royal Indian Navy personnel discharged due to the RIN Mutiny. The court observed that the claim could not be verified against Central records at that stage and recalled a lower order.

What did the court decide?

The communications rejecting the petitioners' claims were set aside; the 2nd Respondent is directed to verify credentials and consider the matter afresh within four months.

Thiyancheri Gopalan Nambiar Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/16TH KARTHIKA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 15671 of 2014 (H)

¶6

PETITIONERS:-

¶7

1. THIYANCHERI GOPALAN NAMBIAR, AGED 88 YEARS, S/O.E.P.KELLAPPAN NAMBIAR, T.V.HOUSE,

¶8

KALAKKET VAYAL, P.O.ARIL, VIA PUTTUVAM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

2. PARUKUTTY, AGED 73 YEARS, W/O.N.T.DAMODARAN NAMBIAR, 'SREEDEEP',

¶10

P.O.CHOVVA, MUNDAYAD, ELAYAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶11

3. P.K.SUBHADRA AMMA, W/O.K.SANKUNNI NAMBIAR,

¶12

'KADANKOT HOUSE' (POOJA NIVAS), ATHIRAKAM, P.O.MUNDAYAD, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶13

4. SARADA V., AGED 84 YEARS, W/O.C.P.KUMARAN, KUMARA VILASAM, MAKRERI, BAVODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶14

5. A.K.PADMINI, AGED 79 YEARS, W/O.LATE M.V.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR,

¶15

'GEETHANJALI HOUSE', KUZHIKKILAYIL, MAVILAYIL, PODUVACHERY POST, KADACHIRA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶16

6. V.R.LEELA AMMA, AGED 76 YEARS, W/O.LATE P.K.KARUNAKARANN NAMBIAR,

¶17

VELLUAVA RAYAROTH (KARUNA), VADAKKUMBAD, MUNDALORE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶18

7. C.LEELA BHASKARAN, AGED 82 YEARS, W/O.LATE A.K.B.ADIYODI, BEENA SADANAM,

¶19

P.O.KARUVAMBRAM, MELAKKAM, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM.

¶20

8. E.N.KIDAVU, AGED 91 YEARS, 'SUMASREE', P.O.NALLALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶21

9. T.NANI AMMA, AGED 82 YEARS, W/O.N.K.GOPALAN NAMBIAR (LATE),

¶22

'VANAJALAYAM', P.O.CHOVVA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶23

2/-

¶24

-2-

¶25

WP(C).No. 15671 of 2014 (H)

¶26

10. K.N.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, AGED 90 YEARS, S/O.V.C.GOPALAN NAMBIAR, KOLLAMBETH HOUSE,

¶27

KOLLANCHIRA, EACHUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶28

11. E.SAROJINI, AGED 80 YEARS, W/O.LATE K.KARUNAKARAN, 'THEJAS',

¶29

PAYYAMBALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶30

12. PADMA NARAYANAN, AGED 74 YEARS, W/O.NARAYANAN, 'GURU VILAS', NETTOOR,

¶31

THALASSERY, NOW RESIDING AT BLUE DALE, NEAR POST OFFICE, MAHE.

¶32

13. RUGMINI C., AGED 72 YEARS, W/O.P.K.KUNHANANDAN NAMBIAR, 'KRIPA',

¶33

CHEKKIAT KAVU, MAYYIL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶34

14. C.K.RAGHAVAN, AGED 97 YEARS,

¶35

S/O.KUNHAMBU, 'LOTUS HOUSE', P.O.THAZHECHOVVA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶36

15. C.M.KARTHIYAYANI AMMA, AGED 80 YEARS, W/O.LATE U.K.SANKARAN NAIR, KUNIYIL HOUSE, PATTIYAM P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT PUSHPA VIHAR, PANTHAKKAL P.O., MAHE.

¶37

BY ADVS.SRI.M.SASINDRAN

¶38

SRI.P.SASI SRI.V.VENUGOPAL

¶39

RESPONDENT(S):

¶40

1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS DIVISION, NEW DELHI-110 003.

¶41

2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FFR DIVISION, NEW DELHI-110 003.

¶42

3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, FREEDOM FIGHTERS PENSION (A) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶43

R1 & R2 BY SRI.N.NAGARESH,ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.B.VINOD

¶44

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶45

sts

¶46

WP(C).No. 15671 of 2014 (H)

¶47

APPENDIX

¶48

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶49

EXHIBIT P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER, DATED 16/5/95.

¶50

EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTION OF PENSION BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DATED 07.07.1985.

¶51

EXHIBIT P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER'S HUSBAND, DATED 9/3/84.

¶52

EXHIBIT P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR. DATED 15/1/86

¶53

EXHIBIT P5. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 20/5/2007

¶54

EXHIBIT P6. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 27/8/92

¶55

EXHIBIT P7. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 5TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 8/6/11

¶56

EXHIBIT P8. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 2/2/11

¶57

EXHIBIT P9. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 28/7/11

¶58

EXHIBIT P10. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 9TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 20/2/04

¶59

EXHIBIT P11. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 10TH PETITIONER. DATED 18/8/05

¶60

EXHIBIT P12. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 11TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 5/3/04

¶61

EXHIBIT P13. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 13TH PETITIONER'S HUSBAND. DATED 10/4/87

¶62

EXHIBIT P14. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 14TH PETITIONER. DATED 24/4/92

¶63

EXHIBIT P15. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.24684 OF 2004 DATED 21.12.2006.

¶64

2/-

¶65

-2-

¶66

WP(C).No. 15671 of 2014 (H)

¶67

EXHIBIT P16. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2014.

¶68

EXHIBIT P16(A). A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10.02.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE RIN MUTINEERS ASSOCIATION.

¶69

EXHIBIT P17. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.1551 OF 2010 DATED 07.12.2011.

¶70

EXHIBIT P18. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.6598 OF 2007 DATED 29.05.2012.

¶71

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

¶77

=====================

¶78

W.P.(C)No.15671 of 2014-H

¶79

========================== Dated this the 07^th day of November, 2017

¶80

Judgment

¶81

The petitioners are the claimants of pension under the Swantantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme (SSS Pension Scheme). The claim raised is on account of the petitioners 1, 8, 10 and 14 and the husbands of the other petitioners, having been employed in the Royal Indian Navy and discharged, for reason of participation in the Royal Indian Navy Mutiny. The petitioners submit that their claims are supported by Exts.P1 to P14 documents. The petitioners 1 to 7 and 9 to 14 submit that Exts.P1 to P14 established their claim for pension under the SSS Pension Scheme. The petitioners 8 and 15 have not produced any documents to substantiate their claim.

¶82

¶83

W.P.(C) No.15671/2014

¶84

In any event, the claim raised cannot be considered by this Court, since it would have to be verified with the actual records maintained by the Central Government. As of now, the petitioner's challenge is against Ext.P16, which rejected their claim, on account of the fact that naval ratings who were discharged under the clause “Excess to requirement as Class-A”, and as a result of the general immobilisation of forces after World War-II have not been recognised for the purpose of grant of pension under the SSS Pension Scheme 1980. The petitioners rely on Exts.P17 and P18 judgments. By Ext.P18 judgment, a person, who was discharged as “Excess to requirement- Class-A” was found to be eligible to claim pension under the SSS Pension Scheme.

¶85

A writ appeal filed was dismissed by judgment dated 06.06.2014 in W.A No.249 of 2014. Ext.P16 is hence set aside to the extent of the 15 petitioners herein. The 2^nd

¶86

¶87

W.P.(C) No.15671/2014

¶88

respondent shall consider the matter afresh and verify the credentials of petitioners 1, 8, 10 and 14 as also the husbands of the other petitioners for grant of pension. If they are found to be persons, who have been discharged as “Excess to requirement Class-A”, then they shall be eligible for the grant. The consideration shall be done, within a period of four months from today. The petitioners are entitled to file supporting documents if any available with them, before the 2^nd respondent, within a period of one month from today.

¶89

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶90

Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶91

SB/07/11/2017

¶92

// true copy //

¶93

P.A to Judge

Thiyancheri Gopalan Nambiar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thiyancheri Gopalan Nambiar v. Union of India

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

Satheesan a Vs Sri.Pankajakshan

M/S.Travancore Foundations Vs the State of Kerala and Others

Ultra Tech Ciment Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Prasanna Vs State of Kerala

Suji.S. Vs State of Kerala

Mariyakutty Vs State of Kerala