Disposed

Selvam.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jul 2022WP(C)/22892/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that prima facie discrimination existed regarding the retirement age of ex-servicemen employed as security personnel versus other private security guards under the 2005 Act. The judge directed respondents to consider the petitioners' request for equal treatment within one month and stayed the relief order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider representation within one month; order relieving petitioners kept in abeyance.

Selvam.K Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 23RD ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1SELVAM.K
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, POLACHIRA VAILAIL, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN – 691001.

¶8

2BABU.S,
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. SANKARA PILLAI, S.B.SADANAM, MAYLAKKADU, PIN –
691571.

¶9

3SANTHA KUMAR G.K.,
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. GANGADHARAN, SHIVA VIHAR, PARAVUR, PIN-691301.

¶10

4REGI G.,
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. KIRIYEN, PUTHEN VEEDU, EAST KALLADA P.O, PIN-
691502.

¶11

BY ADV B.RENJITHKUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695001.

¶14

2 KERALA EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE & REHABILITATION CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KEXCON, OPP. AMRITHA HOTEL, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

3 THE PRINCIPAL, ESI MEDICAL COLLEGE, PARIPPALLI, KOLLAM, PIN – 691574.

¶16

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -2-

¶17

BY ADV.SRI V K SUNIL, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI R S KALKURA

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -3-

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Petitioners four in number are ex-servicemen empanelled in the panel of security staff maintained by the Kerala Ex-serviceman Welfare & Rehabilitation Corporation - respondent No.2 and working as security in the service of the Principal, ESI Medical College, Parippalli, Kollam- respondent No.3.

¶22

The Government of Kerala constituted respondent No.2 as per order dated 23.06.2000. Respondent No.2 vide communication dated 28.05.2022 informed the petitioners that due to the reason of crossing the prescribed age limit i.e., sixty(60) years they will be relieved from the service.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the State of Kerala had promulgated an Act known as Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 which prescribed the upper age limit of a security personal as sixty five (65) years. Though the petitioners are also ex-servicemen, but are

¶24

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -4-

¶25

not private security agencies are being discriminated and not allowed to work till the age of sixty five(65) years.

¶26

A Division Bench of this court while considering this issue had directed the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) to consider whether the exservicemen employed in KSEB would also be allowed to work till sixty five(65) years or not and the matter is pending. Petitioners have in this regard submitted a representation Ext.P2 to the Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Kerala Government on 03.06.2022.

¶27

Learned Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 and 3. Counsel appears for R2.

¶28

Section 10 of the Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 reads as under:

¶29

“Eligibility to be a private security guard : (1) a private security agency shall not employee or engage any person as a private security guard unless he -

¶30

(a) A citizen of India or a citizen of such other country as the Central Government may, by

¶31

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -5-

¶32

notification in the Official Gazette, specify;

¶33

(b) Has completed eighteen years of age but has not attained the age of 65 years .

¶34

¶35

(d) Has completed the prescribed security training successfully;

¶36

(e) Fulfills such physical standards as may be prescribed; and

¶37

(f) Satisfies such other conditions as may be prescribed.”

¶38

Petitioners are ex-sevicemen and employed

¶39

with respondent No.2. Now by virtue of Ext.P1, they had been relieved from the service on attaining the age of sixty(60) years. In my view, prima facie it is a case of discrimination where the ex service men employed under the Act are allowed to continue at the age of 65 whereas the other departments empaneled with the respondent No.2, at the age of sixty(60).

¶40

I deem it appropriate to issue directions to the respondents to consider the request of the petitioners

¶41

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -6-

¶42

dated 03.06.2002 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment, after affording an opportunity of hearing much less in accordance with law. Till such time the order Ext.P1 viz-a-viz the petitioners is ordered to be kept in abeyance.

¶43

 Sd/-

¶44

AMIT RAWAL

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

vv

¶47

WP(C) NO. 22892 OF 2022 -7-

¶48

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22892/2022

¶49

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶50

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
28.5.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶51

Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
3.6.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS.

Selvam.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Selvam.K 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

Mangalam Publications (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Appellate Authority

Shyni. S Vs Maintenance Tribunal for the Welfare of Parents &Senior Citizens (Sub Divisional Magistrate),Kolla

Yousuf S.K. Vs the District Labour Officer

The Assistant Executive Engineer, Vs Consumer Grievance Reddressal Forum

Sansco Technologies Kerala Pvt. .Ltd, Vs Sojan Mathew

Sansco Technologies Kerala Pvt. Ltd. Vs Eldo Varghese