The High Court dismissed an appeal filed regarding pension qualification based on provisional service. The bench held the appeal unsustainable on merits, following a prior judgment, and also dismissed it due to unexplained delay of 481 days without satisfactory explanation in the condonation application.
The writ appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1941
WA.No.1305 of 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.35624/2017 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 04.12.2017
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695001.
2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001.
BY SMT.RAJI T. BHASKAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR.GP. A.J.VARGHESE
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
GEORGE M.A. HEADMASTER (RETD), HOLY CROSS HSS, CHERPUNKAL, RESIDING AT MANIYANGATTU HOUSE, KOZHUVANAL P.O., KOTTAYAM-686573.
BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ KUM.A.ARUNA KUM.THULASI K. RAJ
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA.No.1305 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
K. Vinod Chandran, J.
This writ appeal is filed with a delay of 481 days. There is serious objection with respect to the condonation of delay. We have also looked at the merits of the matter. The issue is as to the provisional service being reckoned for the purpose of qualifying service for pension. We have already held in the judgment dated 04.07.2019 in W.A. No.1235 of 2018 [State of Kerala & Others v. Sabu Mathew & Others] that the same has to be reckoned approving the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Hence, on merits, we do not find any sustainable ground for appeal. We also do not find any satisfactory explanation for the delay occasioned from the affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application.
WA.No.1305 of 2019
3
Hence we dismiss the appeal both on the
aspect of delay and on merits. There is no order as
to costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
Sd/-
V.G. ARUN, JUDGE.
sp/12/07/19
//True Copy//
P.A. To Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the writ appeal should be condoned.
Whether provisional service should be reckoned for qualifying service for pension.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Kerala & Others v. Sabu Mathew & OthersFollowed¶22
State of Kerala Represented by Secretary to Government, Department of General Education
George M.A. Headmaster (Retd)
K. Vinod Chandran
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
