Dismissed

The Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee v. K.Sukumaran

Kerala HC4 Sept 2019WA/1911/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ appeal, upholding the Single Judge's decision that the first respondent is entitled to full pay till age 60 and regular service status under amended Guruvayur Devaswam Regulations, despite pensionary benefits being calculated up to 56 years.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed; appellants directed to disburse monetary emoluments due to the first respondent as per regular service rules until age 60.

The Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 13TH BHADRA, 1941

¶7

WA.No.1911 OF 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.2.2019 IN WP(C).NO.28015/2017(B) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4:

¶10

1 THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR,

¶11

GURUVAYUR - 680 101.

¶12

2 THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, SREE PADMAM BUILDIING, GURUVAYUR - 680 101.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

¶14

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:

¶15

1 K.SUKUMARAN, AGED 57 YEARS, KALIYOGAM ASHAN, KSHETHRA KALANILAYAM, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR - 680 101, RESIDING AT 'HARISREEVALSAM, CHAMUNDESWARY ROAD, GURUVAYUR - 680 101.

¶16

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEVASWOM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶17

3 GURUVBAYOOR DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (DEVASWOM), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶18

R1 BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN C.MENON

¶19

R2 & R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-09-2019, THE COURT ON 04-09-2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.A.No.1911 of 2019

Judgment

Chitambaresh, J.

We do not think that the learned single Judge has in any way erred in holding that the age of superannuation of the first respondent who is a Krishnanaattam Kaliyogam Aasan is 60 years to be exact. But the service up to the age of 55 years alone would be reckoned for pensionary benefits as per the Guruvayur Devaswam Employees Regulation, 1983. The age of superannuation was subsequently reduced to 56 years with a consolidated pay up to the age of 60 years as per the amendment to the Regulations in the year 2015. The amendment was the subject matter of litigations and the age of superannuation was subsequently restored to 60 years by yet another amendment in 2018.

¶26

The amended Regulations now permit the first respondent to remain in service till 31.1.2020 when he attains the age of 60 years though pensionary benefits would be counted on 56 years. That the first respondent is entitled to the benefit of

¶27

W.A.No.1911 of 2019

¶28

¶29

the amended Regulations is evident from Ext.P26 letter of the Government and Ext.P27 proceedings of the Administrator. The first respondent is entitled to the full pay in regular service till the age of 60 years and not a consolidated pay as is contended by the Guruvayur Devaswom.

¶30

We are not satisfied that either the first respondent or his wife who is employed in the Office of the Administrator has in any way contributed to Ext.P27 proceedings issued in the light of Ext.P26 letter. We must note that Krishnanaattam is an offering to the Lord in the Temple and Krishnanaattam Kaliyogam Aasan (Teacher) is a vanishing category among artists. We must also note that Ext.P26 letter of the Government is with specific reference to the first respondent whereas Annexure-A6 letter of the same date is general. The Government by Annexure-A6 letter only granted permission for amendment of the Regulations and does not in any way detract from the efficacy of Exts.P26 letter and P27 proceedings.

¶31

W.A.No.1911 of 2019

¶32

¶33

The learned single Judge was absolutely justified in directing the appellants to disburse the monetary emoluments due to the first respondent on the basis of the Regulations as amended. The monetary benefits shall be as equal to an employee on the regular rolls whose age of superannuation is 60 years notwithstanding his pensionable service as up to 56 years.

¶34

The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.

¶35

Sd/V. CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE

¶36

Sd/ASHOK MENON, JUDGE

Sha/030919

W.A.No.1911 of 2019

APPENDIX

APPELLANTS' EXHIBITS:

¶42

ANNEXURE A1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.10.2015 ISSUED BY REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT NO.25966/DEV2/2015/RD.
ANNEXURE A2	TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATORY ORDER DATED 23.05.2016 ISSUED BY REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT.
ANNEXURE A3	TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.2 DATED 07.06.2016.
ANNEXURE A4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29.06.2016.
ANNEXURE A5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2016.
ANNEXURE A6	THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.07.2018.
ANNEXURE A7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO. 13 DATED 25.07.2018.
ANNEXURE P8	TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.25 DATED 13.08.2019 OF THE GDMC.

The Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee v. K.Sukumaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee v. K.Sukumaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aswas S.S Vs Union of India

State of Kerala Vs K.R. Vijayamohanan

Government of Kerala Vs P. Gopinathan

Kerala Public Service Commission Vs Dhanitha M.A.

Special Director General Vs Rajesh K R

A.Anilkumar, Vs Union of India