Disposed¶44

K.C. Asokan v. State of Kerala

Writ Petition (Civil) – Service law – Retirement age

Kerala HC26 Mar 2025WP(C)/14995/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP(C) 14995/2024, High Court of Kerala (D. K. Singh, J., 26.03.2025): Retired KSIDC Senior Superintendent (retired 30.04.2024, 31 years' service) sought enhancement of retirement age from 58 to 60 years. Court held retirement age is a policy decision embodied in the KSIDC Staff Regulations; no right to enhancement absent policy decision and amendment of Rules; Government rejection of 02.12.2023 noted; petition disposed with liberty to KSIDC to move the expert committee via Board resolution.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief to the petitioner; liberty granted to KSIDC to pass a resolution and forward a request to the expert committee, which shall examine the case as per the required parameters and communicate its decision to KSIDC. ¶44

K.C. Asokan Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a retired Senior Superintendent of KSIDC who demitted office on 30.04.2024, has a right to claim enhancement of his retirement age from 58 to 60 years, when the governing KSIDC Staff Regulations fix the retirement age at 58 years and no applicable policy decision or amendment of the Regulations exists.

¶25

Court's answer

What should be the retirement age of employees working in Government or a Public Sector Undertaking is a policy decision reflected in the relevant service Rules/Regulations; unless a policy decision is taken to enhance the retirement age from 58 to 60 years and correspondingly the Rules are amended, the petitioner has no right to claim such enhancement.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to KSIDC to pass a resolution making a request to the expert committee to examine the case of its employees for enhancing their retirement age from 58 to 60 years; if the Board of KSIDC so decides and forwards the request, the expert committee shall examine the case as per the required parameters and communicate its decision to KSIDC.

¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Civil) — Service law — Retirement age — Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (KSIDC) — Petitioner, Senior Superintendent in KSIDC, demitted office on 30.04.2024 after 31 years of service; the KSIDC Staff Regulations fix the retirement age at 58 years. A Government Order dated 29.10.2022 (Ext.P14) had enhanced PSU retirement age to 60 years but was recalled within a week; the Government thereafter chose to consider requests only from individual PSUs, made in the prescribed format before an expert committee. The request routed by the KSIDC employees union through the Managing Director was rejected by Government order dated 02.12.2023. Held (D. K. Singh, J.): fixation of retirement age is a policy decision reflected in the relevant service Rules/Regulations; unless a policy decision enhances the age and the Rules are correspondingly amended, an employee has no right to claim enhancement from 58 to 60 years. Writ petition finally disposed of with liberty to the KSIDC Board to pass a resolution and place a request before the expert committee, which shall examine it per the required parameters and communicate its decision.

¶1

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶2

¶3

2025:KER:26765

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH

¶7

WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947

¶8

WP(C) NO. 14995OF 2024

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

K.C. ASOKAN
AGED 57 YEARS

¶11

S/O. K.V. CHELLAPPAN, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, KERALA STATE
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KESTON ROAD,
OPPOSITE TO RAJ BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695
003, RESIDING AT K-45, SMRUTHI LANE, KOCHAR ROAD,
SASTHAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010

¶12

BY ADV S.VISHNU

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
INDUSTRIES (J) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶15

2 KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KESTON ROAD, OPPOSITE TO RAJ BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 895003

¶16

3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, KESTON ROAD, OPPOSITE TO RAJ BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003

¶17

BY ADV P.U.SHAILAJAN

¶18

ADV.BIMAL K.NATH - GP

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

2025:KER:26765

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26^th day of March, 2025

¶25

The petitioner demitted office on 30.04.2024 from the post of Senior Superintendent in the Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation ( for short ‘KSIDC’) after rendering 31 years of service. The service conditions of the employees of the KSIDC are governed by the Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Limited Staff Regulations. As per the said Regulations, the retirement age of the employees working in the KSIDC is 58 years.

¶26

It appears that the Government considered the case of enhancement of the retirement age of the employees working with the Kerala State Public Sector Undertakings and a decision was taken to enhance the age of retirement from 58 years to 60

¶27

vide Government Order dated years 29.10.2022(Ext.P14). However, the said order was

¶28

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶29

¶30

2025:KER:26765 recalled after a week, and the Government decided

¶31

that it would consider the case of individual PSU for enhancement of retirement age from 58 years to 60 years if the request were made by the concerned PSU in the prescribed format before the expert committee constituted for the said purposes.

¶32

It appears that the employees union of KSIDC has submitted a request directly to the Managing Director of KSIDC for enhancing the age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years and the Managing Director forwarded the request to the Government. The Government has rejected the said

¶33

request vide order dated 02.12.2023, stating that the request for enhancement of retirement age of the employees working with the KSIDC from 58 years to 60 Yeats cannot be considered at this point of time.

¶34

The learned counsel appearing for KSIDC submits that the Board has not taken any decision to

¶35

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶36

¶37

2025:KER:26765 submit a request for enhancement of the retirement

¶38

age from 58 years to 60 years of the employees working in the KSIDC and as and when the Board of KSIDC takes a decision to make a request, the required resolution shall be passed by the Board of Directors to that effect and the request shall be submitted before the expert committee in the prescribed format.

¶39

What should be the retirement age of the employees working in the Government or Public Sector Undertaking is a policy decision reflected in the relevant service Rules/Regulations. The petitioner, when entered into service, knew what would be his date of retirement from the employment. Unless the policy decision is taken to enhance the retirement age from 58 years to 60 years, and correspondingly Rules are amended, the petitioner has no right to claim enhancement of retirement age from 58 years to 60 years.

¶40

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶41

¶42

2025:KER:26765 6. In view thereof, the present writ petition is

¶43

disposed of with liberty to the KSIDC to pass a resolution for making a request to the expert committee to examine the case of the employees of the KSIDC for enhancing their age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years, and if, the Board of the KSIDC takes such a decision and pass the resolution and forward the request to the expert committee constituted for the said purposes, the committee shall examine the case as per the required parameters and communicate its decision to the KSIDC.

¶44

With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

¶47

D. K. SINGH JUDGE

¶48

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶49

¶50

2025:KER:26765

¶51

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14995/2024

¶52

`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF KERALA STATE` `INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED STAFF` `REGULATIONS`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA ITEM NO. E7 FOR THE 306TH` `BOARD MEETING OF KSIDC`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.` `KSIDC/TVM/MD/2017/2294 DATED 16.11.2017 ADDRESSED` `TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P3(a)`	`TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO.` `KSIDC/TVM/3468/2014/608 DATED 20.06.2014` `ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P3(b)`	`TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO.` `KSIDC/TVM/3468/2014/957 DATED 24.07.2014` `ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 108/2014/ID DATED` `31.7.2014 ISSUED BY THE INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT.)NO. 1323/2011/ID DATED` `24.10.2011 OF THE INDUSTRIES (H) DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 03/2012/S&T DATED` `16.4.2012 OF THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY` `DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 146/2013/CO-OP. DATED` `29.11.2013 OF THE COOPERATION DEPARTMENT.`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 8/2014/H&FWD DATED` `4.1.2014 OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P9`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 131/2014/H&FWD DATED` `30.4.2014 OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P10`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 160/2014/H&FWD DATED` `30.5.2014 OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P11`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 29/14/PLG DATED 8.7.2014`

¶53

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶54

¶55

2025:KER:26765

¶56

ISSUED BY THE PLANNING & ECONOMIC AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT

¶57

`Exhibit P12`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO. 745/2014/H.EDN. DATED` `29.8.2014 ISSUED BY THE HIGHER EDUCATION` `DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P13`	`TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO. 469/2014/FIN DATED` `31.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.`
`Exhibit P14`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO. 131/2022/FIN DATED` `29.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P15`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO. 135/2022/FIN DATED` `04.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P16`	`TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P)NO. 18/2023/P&EA DATED` `20.09.2023 ISSUED BY THE PLANNING & ECONOMIC` `AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT`
`Exhibit P17`	`TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO.` `KSIDC/TVM/MDO/2023/2120 DATED 20.10.2023 ISSUED` `BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P18`	`: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. IND-J3/187/2022-` `IND DATED 02.12.2023 FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO` `THE 3RD RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P19`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.03.2024` `SUBMITTED BY THE KSIDC EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION TO` `THE CHIEF MINISTER.`
`Exhibit P20`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.03.2024` `SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P21`	`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 16.12.2014` `IN W.P.(C)NO. 18668 OF 2014 AND W.P.(C)NO. 25184` `OF 2014 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.`
`Exhibit P22`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.02.2015 IN` `R.P.NO. 42 OF 2015 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.`
`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES`
`Annexure R1(a)`	`True copy of the GO(Ms)No.402/17/Fin dated 25-08-` `2017`
`Annexure R1(d)`	`True copy of the Letter No.J3/187/2022/IND dated` `02-12-2023`

¶58

WP(C) NO. 14995 OF 2024

¶59

¶60

2025:KER:26765

¶61

Annexure R1(f) True copy of the Order dated 25-07-2022 of
Honourable Supreme Court record proceedings

¶62

Annexure R1(b) True copy of the GO(p)No.131/2022/FIN dated 29-
10-2022

¶63

Annexure R1(c) True copy of the GO(p)No.135/2022/FIN dated 04-
11-2022(True copy of translation copy of Annexure
R1(c) is attached)

¶64

Annexure R1(e) True copy of the Letter No.J3/187/2022/IND dated
28-06-2024(True copy of translation copy of
Annexure R1(e) is attached)

K.C. Asokan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.C. Asokan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivaprasad.K Vs State of Kerala

Aneena Joseph Vs the High Court of Kerala

Anil K. Vs State of Kerala

President, Chorode Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. LL-139, Vs the Kerala Co-Operative Tribunal

Subhadramma T.G., Vs Union of India

G.Madhusoodanan Namboothiri, Vs Travancore Devaswom Board