The High Court of Kerala dismissed writ petitions filed by employees of Kerala State Land Development Corporation seeking retrospective enhancement of retirement age. The court held the Government notification applied prospectively from its date and left open the challenge on its merits.
No relief granted; petitions dismissed.
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 SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 23832 OF 2019
PETITIONER:
SUNIL KUMAR.A.S AGED 56 YEARS S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, ALAYIL HOUSE, P.O. NEDUPUZHA, THRISSUR BY ADVS. R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN SMT.R.RANJANIE SRI.M.ASHOK KINI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 2 KERALA STATE LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, MUSEUM BAINS COMPOUND, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695003 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 3 THE EXPERT COMMITTEE FOR STUDY ON THE FORMULATION OF A COMMON FRAME WORK FOR PAY/WAGE REVISION IN PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING,S CONSTITUTED BY THE PLANNING AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS(BPE) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.BAIJURAJ (r2)
OTHER PRESENT:
GP PARVATHY KOTTOL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
2
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
16.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).3428/2020, 16442/2018, THE COURT ON 23/9/2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 3428 OF 2020
PETITIONERS:
1 BOBAN .A.G. AGED 45 YEARS CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THRISSUR
4
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THRISSUR
ACCOUNTS OFFICER (I/C), KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THRISSUR
ASSISTANT PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THRISSUR
5
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
OVERSEER GRADE II, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
| 24 | INDU V. |
|---|---|
| ASSISTANT GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM |
|
| 25 | REJITH RAGHAVAN |
| DRIVER GRADE II, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT | |
| CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM |
| 26 | RIZWANA BAI |
|---|---|
| ASSISTANT GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT | |
| CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM |
| 27 | SUSMITHA K.S. |
|---|---|
| ASSISTANT GRADE II, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT | |
| CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM |
| 30 | JAYASREE A.K. |
|---|---|
| SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA |
|
| 31 | SUJA P.T. |
| ASSISTANT GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA |
|
| 32 | SANTHOSH HEBBY JOHN CLERICAL ASSISTANT, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA |
| 33 | SUNITHAKUMARI K. LASCAR / HELPER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA |
| 34 | MUHAMMED IQBAL S. |
6
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
LASCAR / HELPER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ALAPPUZHA
| 36 | JAYAKUMAR G. ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER (1/C), KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
|---|---|
| 37 | ULLAS S. CLERICAL ASSISTANT, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, OFFICE OF THE PROJECT ENGINEER, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 38 | AJEEB A.V. SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 39 | ARUNDAS K.H. ASSISTANT GRADE - II, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 40 | GOPAN S. TYPIST GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 41 | SUNIJA K.S. PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 42 | MESMER B. ASSISTANT PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 43 | N.K. RADHAKRISHNAN OVERSEER GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 44 | HASSINA BEEVI A. OVERSEER GRADE II, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
| 45 | HAREESH A. OVERSEER GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT |
| CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA |
7
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
49 JAYARANI G. ASSISTANT PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA 50 RAJALEKSHMI T. OVERSEER GRADE I, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA 51 PATHROSE V. PART - TIME SWEEPER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA 52 SHOJI ANTONY K.G. DRIVER - GR.I, OFFICE OF THE PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA 53 SHAJI C.K. PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 54 MANI C.T. DRIVER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 55 REJIMOL P.S. ASSISTANT PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, N. PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM BY ADVS. P.N.MOHANAN SRI.C.P.SABARI SMT.AMRUTHA SURESH
RESPONDENTS:
8
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
FOR STUDY ON THE FORMATION OF COMMON FRAME WORK FOR PAY / WAGE REVISION IN PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS, CONSTITUTED BY PLANNING AND ECONOMIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
BY ADVS.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.BAIJURAJ G., SC, KLDC LTD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).23832/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 23/9/2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
9
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 16442 OF 2018
PETITIONERS:
1 S.KUMARI CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER, KERALA STATE LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, ALAPPUZHA.
2 LAILA M PROJECT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.R.RAJPRADEEP
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNEMNT,AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BAIJURAJ G., SC, KLDC LTD. SHRI.BAIJURAJ G., SC, KLDC LTD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).23832/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 23/9/2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
10
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
COMMON JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.23832/2019, 3428/2020, 16442/2018]
The writ petitioners are employees of Kerala State Land Development Corporation working in its various offices. The Kerala Land Development Corporation Ltd. (KLDC Ltd. hereinafter) was formed in 1972, under the Administrative Control of the Agricultural Department. The retirement age of the employees of the KLDC was fixed as 56 years. They are governed by EPF Pension Scheme 1995 . Under the EPF pension scheme, a member will be eligible to get full pension on attaining the age of 58 years even though he retires at the age of 56. The eligibility criteria for getting pension is that the member should have completed ten years of service and should have reached 58 years. According to the petitioner, about 60 public sector undertakings are under the control of the State of Kerala, where the age of the employees is either 58 years or 60 years. Government of Kerala, introduced contributory pension scheme with effect from 1-4-2013, to their employees and simultaneously revised their retirement age to 60 years by making an amendment to the Kerala Service Rules. However, the retirement age of persons engaged by KLDC Ltd., remain to be 56 years which according to the employees, was discriminatory.
11
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
14/5/1998 resolved to enhance the age of retirement of the employees from 55 to 60 years. The resolution was turned down by the Agricultural Department by an order dated 30/11/1999 on the ground that the Corporation was running on loss. In the meanwhile, some of the employees approached this Court by filing Writ Petition which was disposed of by judgment dated 4/6/2004, directing the Government to take decision within four months. The request for enhancement of retirement age was again turned down by the Government. Petitioners now claim that, the Corporation is running on profit.
12
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
(C)No.3428/2020 had retired on 30/4/2020, and 30/6/2020 respectively. The sole petitioner in W.P(C) No.23832/2019 retired on 30/9/2019. In W.P.(C) No.164442/2018, the date of retirement age of the petitioners were 31/5/2018 and 30/6/2018 respectively and on attaining the age of 56 years they also retired. All the above persons retired pending the writ petitions and also when the enhancement of retirement age was under active consideration of the Corporation and the Government.
13
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
consider the representations in the light of the various Government orders raising the retirement age of the employees of the Corporation to 58 years or 60 years. It was also requested that ,it may be declared that, they are entitled to get enhancement of the retirement age as 58/60 years as the employees of other statutory Corporations are retiring on attaining the age of 58 years or 60 years.
14
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
Government to clarify whether the Government Order dated 19/2/2021 enhancing the age of retirement to 58 years could be extended only to employees in service as on the date of notification or whether it would enure to the benefit of the employees who had retired pending the writ petitions. The Government was directed to revert and the case was posted for further orders. Accordingly, by order dated 1/7/2021, the Government clarified that the enhancement of retirement age from 56 years to 58 by notification dated 19/2/2021, would be effective from the date of notification and since 13th and 21st petitioners retired prior to 19/2/2021, they are not entitled to the above benefits. The above order is produced as Ext.P17 in W.P.(C) No.3428/2020.
15
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
above, on the ground that, the order is discriminatory and the Government ought to have given retrospective operation to the statute. It was further contended that, in the case of five employees viz.petitioners Nos 13 and 21 in W.P.(C) No.3428/2020, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.23823/2019 and petitioners in W.P.(C) No.16442/2018, who retired during the pendency of the writ proceedings, the benefit is liable to be extended to them. It was contended that fixing a cut of date excluding certain persons who were party to the lis cannot be justified and they are liable to be saved in the light of the pendency of the proceedings.
16
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
is made clear that the writ petitioners will be entitled to challenge the notification itself on any grounds available , if so advised, in an appropriate proceedings, This is all the more so, since there may be several other persons who have not approached the court, though retired in the interregnum.
“ It is needless to mention that the if the Government comes up with any policy decision raising the present age of retirement and the petitioners Nos. 13, and 21 falls within the present criteria, petitioners Nos.13 and 21 would be entitled to claim the benefits not withstanding their retirement.”
Relying on this, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that, this saved the case of the petitioners 13 and 21, who were specifically protected by the above directions, notwithstanding their retirement during the pendency of the proceedings.
17
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
petitioners 13 and 21 do not fall within the proposed age criteria as the orders stand now .
18
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
and 21 in the light of the interim order, such a protection cannot be extended to other petitioners, who were similarly situated. This court cannot also be oblivious of the fact that there may be a possibility of few other employees similarly situated and had retired during the pendency of these proceedings, but have not approached this court. Virtually, this court does not propose to segregate few persons who are granted such relief by an interim order and grant a benefit.
19
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
In the light of the above, I am inclined to dismiss the writ petition holding that no relief can be granted in this writ petition. However, this will not preclude the petitioners from challenging the Government Order to the extent it denies the right to persons who retired prior to that during the interregnum of passing the resolution till the date of order and those of the petitioners who retired pending the proceedings. Their right to challenge the legality of the Government Order and the clarificatory order passed thereafter, in accordance with law, if any such grounds is available, is left open. It is made clear, that no comment is made in these writ petitions regarding the merits of the above Government Order. The writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
Judge
dpk
20
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3428/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT P1 | A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT.) NO.1483/2010 ID DATED18.10.2010 |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (MS) NO.15/2011 DATED 01.03.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P3 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.33/2011 DATED 22.02.2011 OF THE GOVERNMENT |
| EXHIBIT P4 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.01/2011 CSIN DATED 26.02.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P5 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(MS) NO.65/2011 DATED 26.02.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P6 | A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OBTAINED ON 01.08.2019 UNDER THE RTI ACT |
| EXHIBIT P7 | A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. (P) NO. 20/2013 FIN. DATED 07.01.2013 |
| EXHIBIT P8 | A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.08.2017 OF THE GOVERNMENT |
| EXHIBIT P9 | A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.2907 DATED 23.11.2017 OF THE KLDC |
| EXHIBIT P10 | A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.01.2018 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT |
| EXHIBIT P11 | A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.04.2018 OF THE EMPLOYEES |
| EXHIBIT P12 | A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 26.12.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE KLDC EMPLOYEES UNION BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT |
| EXT.P14: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10/6/2020 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3428/2020 |
21
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
EXT.P15: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/2/2021 OF THE GOVERNMENT.
EXT.P16: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KLDC/ADMN/RTD.CON.EMP/1332/2020 DATED 12/8/2020 OF THE KLDC Exhibit P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.NO.64/2021 DATED 01.07.2021 OF THE GOVERNMENT.
22
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16442/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT | P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE EMPLOYEES UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO ITS CHAIRMAN ON 7-10-2017. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT | P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 23-11- 2017 OF THE 275TH MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTOR OF KLDC. |
| EXHIBIT | P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER VIDE NO.KLDC/A4/ADMN/SSRAC/719/17 DATED 16-1- 2018 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT | P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.175/PU.3/2017/AGRI. DATED 9-3-2018. |
| EXHIBIT | P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) NO.1483/2010/ID DATED 18-10-2010. |
| EXHIBIT | P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS) NO.33/2011/TD DATED 22-2-2011. |
| EXHIBIT | P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS) NO.65/11/AD DATED 26-2-2011. |
| EXHIBIT | P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS) NO.1/2011/CSIN DATED 26-2-2011. |
| EXHIBIT | P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS)NO.15/2011/FOREST DATED 1-3-2011. |
| EXHIBIT | P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE EMPLOYEES OF KLDC BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT ON 26-4-2018. |
| EXHIBIT | P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE REMAINDER DATED 16-5-2018 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT. |
| EXHIBIT | P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE REMAINDER DATED 16-5-2018 |
| SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURAL |
23
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
DEPARTMENT.
EXT.P13: COPY OF COMUNICATION NO.57/PU/2018/AGRI.DATED 29/6/2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXT.P14: COPY OF GO(MS) NO.402/2017/FIN.DATED 25/8/2017
RESPNDENTS EXHIBITS:
EXT.R1(A): COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER DATED 29/6/2018
24
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23832/2019
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26.08.2019, RECEIVED FROM KAMCO |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19.08.2019 RECEIVED FROM PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED |
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.08.2019, RECEIVED FROM STATE FARMING CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD |
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 09.08.2019 RECEIVED FROM OIL PALM INDIA LTD. |
| EXHIBIT P2 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 25.08.2017 |
| EXHIBIT P3 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF EXTRACT OF RESOLUTION NO.2907 DATED 23.11.2017 |
| EXHIBIT P4 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.1.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT BEFORE GOVERNMENT |
| EXHIBIT P5 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 18.10.2010 |
| EXHIBIT P6 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 22.2.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P7 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 26.2.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P8 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 26.2.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P9 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 1.03.2011 |
| EXHIBIT P10 | THE PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 26.04.2018 SUBMITTED BY EMPLOYEES OF 2ND RESPONDENT CORPORATION |
25
W.P.(C)Nos.16442/2018,23832/2019 &3428/2020
EXHIBIT P11 THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 6.10.2018
EXHIBIT P12 THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16.09.2019 RECEIVED FROM KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P13 THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26.08.2019 RECEIVED FROM THE KERALA AGRO MACHINERY CORPORATION EXHIBIT P14 THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 27.08.2019, RECEIVED FROM THE KERALA STATE HORTI CULTURAL PRODUCTS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED
EXT.P15: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 30/9/2019 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P16: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 30/9/2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER OF THE SCOND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P17: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.30/2021/AGRICULTURE DATED 19/2/2021
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.170/12/FIN, DATED 22-03-2012. EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF 28OTH MEETING DATED 28.09.2019.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Government notification enhancing retirement age from 56 to 58 years was retrospectively effective from the date of the Board of Directors resolution or only from the date of the notificat
Whether retired employees who retired during the pendency of the writ petitions are entitled to the benefit of the retrospective enhancement of retirement age.
Whether the respondents are entitled to any relief in the absence of a specific challenge to the legality of the Government Orders.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and Anr. v. B.D.Singhal and OrsFollowed¶12
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and Anr. v. B.D.Singhal and Ors (AIR 2021 SC 3457) · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sunil Kumar A.S
Baban A.G
S.Kumari
State of Kerala
Kerala State Land Development Corporation Limited
Expert Committee for Study on the Formulation of a Common Framework for Pay/Wage Revision
Sunil Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
