Disposed

Sajeevan P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jan 2021WP(C)/238/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the State of Kerala to consider the petitioner's representation seeking enhancement of retirement age within three months after giving him notice and an opportunity of being heard, citing a pending declaration request.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within three months after providing notice and an opportunity of being heard.

Sajeevan P. Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942 WP(C).No.238 OF 2021(D)

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

SAJEEVAN P. AGED 57 YEARS RETIRED PHARMACIST,MALABAR CANCER CENTRE,THALASSERY,R/AT SANGEETHA HOUSE,KARUVACHERY,NILESHWAR.P.O, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671314.

¶7

BY ADVS. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH SRI.K.P.ANTONY BINU

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVAANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶10

2 MALABAR CANCER CENTRE, THALASSERY,REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,THALASSERY,PO MOOZHIKKARA, KANNUR-670103.

¶11

GP-SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No.238 OF 2021(D)

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Dated this the 6th day of January 2021

¶17

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶18

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the respondents; to permit petitioner to continue in service as pharmacist in the second respondent institution until the age of 60 years.

¶19

ii) Issue a further direction to the respondents to finalise the rule as to the retirement age of Non-academic staff, in line with the decision taken by the Executive Committee on 06.08.2014 and Governing Body in Ext.P7;”

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P11 representation seeking enhancement of retirement age is pending before the 1^st respondent and is liable to be considered in accordance with law.

¶22

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 1^st respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Ext.P11 representation preferred by the petitioner within a period of three months from

¶23

WP(C).No.238 OF 2021(D)

¶24

¶25

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall be put on notice and heard by any appropriate means including through video conferencing before orders are passed as directed above. In case any favourable orders are passed in the representation, the petitioner will be entitled to the benefits thereof.

¶26

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

SVP

WP(C).No.238 OF 2021(D)

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER DATED 06.12.2000 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 29.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF GOVERNING BODY ON 24.01.2019 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 17.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF GO(MS)NO.36/2019/H&FD DATED 02.03.2019 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.126/2019/H&FWD DATED 7.08.2019 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE 77TH MEETING OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DATED 29.09.2020 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 10.11.2020 CONTAINING INFORMATION EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 17.06.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

¶37

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 1.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE GOVERNMENT.

Sajeevan P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajeevan P. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omana K.R Vs State of Kerala

Sanal Kumar G., Vs the Regional Officer

Rajesh K. Vs the Kseb Limited

Alfiya Shefeek Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Prathibha .T Vs the Director

Noor Mohamed Nooreesa Vs Central Board of Secondary Education Affiliation Branch