Disposed

Veena K.S. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jan 2019WP(C)/381/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, an office attendant working with the Special Tahsildar office, sought directions under Article 226 for the State Nodal Officer of the National Pension System to furnish credit details of her pension account and to act on her complaint with notice and opportunity of hearing. The court consolidated the reliefs and directed the respondent to consider the complai

What did the court decide?

Directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 complaint with notice to the petitioner and an authorized representative of the 3rd respondent and pass an order within two months.

Veena K.S. Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 18TH POUSHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 381 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VEENA K.S., RAJ BHAVAN, MEENAM, PATTAZHY.P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691522 (OFFICE ATTENDANT, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA, POWER GRID, PATHANAPURAM).

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

2 ADDITIONAL SECRETARY(PENSION), (STATE NODAL OFFICER,NPS) FINANCE DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

3 MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.

¶13

4 ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, PATHANAPURAM DEPOT, KOLLAM DISTRICT-689697.

¶14

5 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION,POWER GRID,PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-689697.

¶15

SRI K.P. HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI T.P.SAJAN, SC FOR KSRTC

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)381 OF 2019

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is presently working as Office Attendant in the office of the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition at Pathanapuram, who had worked as Conductor in Pathanapuram Depot of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation for the period from 27.07.2015 to 26.07.2018, as evidenced by Ext.P3 certificate dated 03.08.2018 issued by the 4^th respondent Assistant Transport Officer, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent, the Additional Director (Pension), who is the State Nodal Officer of National Pension System to furnish the credit details of the amount lying in the credit of her pension account together with employer contribution to the 5^th respondent for the continued operation of National Pension System to her. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P6 complaint made by her, with notice to her, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1,

¶22

WP(C)381 OF 2019 3

¶23

2 and 5 and also the learned Standing Counsel for KSRTC representing respondents 3 and 4.

¶24

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would confine the reliefs sought in this writ petition as one directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate order on Ext.P6 complaint dated 29.11.2018, with notice to the petitioner and after affording her an opportunity of being heard.

¶25

The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that the 2^nd respondent shall consider Ext.P6 complaint made by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and also an authorised representative of the 3^rd respondent, and necessary orders shall be passed within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶26

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 complaint made by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and also to an authorised representative of the 3^rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy

of this judgment.

All legal and factual contentions raised by the petitioner are

¶31

left open to be raised before the 2^nd respondent.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ADVICE LETTER DATED 29/11/2013 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE PSC.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 23/07/2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOLLAM
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 3/8/2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.135/2014/FIN DATED 8/4/2014
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF RECOVERY ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 29/11/2018 OF THE PETITIONER SENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶40

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶41

TRUE COPY

¶42

P.A. TO JUDGE

Veena K.S. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veena K.S. v. State of Kerala

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

K.J.Jijo Vs the Secretary

Rajan M.G. Vs the Managing Director

P.K.Santhosh Vs Regional Transport Authority

Johnson.C.L Vs the Secretary

Ayisha Vs the Secretary

Sudheer S., Vs the Secretary