Whether a pensioner can be denied family pension is one of the interesting questions arising for consideration in this case. Petitioners were recruited through the Employment Exchange on a provisional basis for appointment under the Small Farmers Development Agency on 12-3-1976. The SFDA was abolished in the year 1982 and the District Rural Development Agency was formed. Petitioners were transferred to DRDA. Though the petitioners continued uninterruptedly they were not given the benefits due to the regular employees except the stagnation increment. In the matter of regularisation the petitioners approached this court in O.P.No.20212/1996 and consequently they were regularized in service in the Rural Development Department as per Ext.P2 government order dated 29-9-1998. Since the service benefits were not granted, the matter was again taken up before this court leading to O.P.No.24923/1999.The Government thereafter issued Ext.P3 government order dated 23-12-2000, purportedly redressing the grievance of all the provisional employees of DRDA. It is significant to note that altogether there were only 21 such employees. It will be profitable to extract the operative portion of Ext.P3 regarding the benefits conferred on the employees:-

(i) The 21 provisional hands including persons retired will be deemed to have been regularized in the services of the respective District Rural Development Agencies. They will continue as regular employees.

(ii) The date of regularisation will be the date of joining duty of each employment or appointment through Employment Exchanges.

(iii) All service benefits including leave, Travelling Allowance, Pay revision, increment and Grade Promotion as per Part I & II KSRs will have effect from 29-9-1998 only i.e. the date of the original order.

(iv) The pensionary claims will be settled as per Rules as Part III K.S.Rs. But Rules regarding family pension (Rule 90 part III KSRs) will not be extended to these provisional hands now regularized.

(v) DA on pension will be paid to these employees.

(vi) The expenditure towards salary and pensionary benefits will be met from the Administrative Expenditure of DRDAs”

2. It may be noted that Government passed Ext.P3 order in continuation of Ext.P2 order wherein a policy decision was taken in the matter of regularisation. It will be profitable to refer to the relevant portion in Ext.P2 also so as to gather the intention of the Government:-

“3. Government have carefully considered the views expressed by the Kerala Public Service Commission in the matter. The provisional hands continuing in DRDAs have put in a service ranging from 12 to 20 years and have crossed the age limit for entry into any other cadre. For want of regularisation of their service, they are not eligible for pension and allied benefits. Having examined all the relevant aspects in a humanitarian angle, Government are pleased to issue the following orders overruling the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission.”

It may be seen from Ext.P2 that the Government was aware of the fact that for want of regularisation, the petitioners and similarly situated employees were not eligible for pension and allied benefits. Ext.P3 Government order dated 23-12-2000 dealt with the pension and allied matters. Despite such a generous intention the benefits were granted only subject to restrictions referred to above. The reason for such restrictions are stated at paragraphs 16 and 17 of the counter affidavit which read as follows:-

16. It is also submitted that since the appointments of the petitioners were made without following the normal procedure or assessing suitability, KSR, in toto cannot be extended. It is stated that in the G.O.(MS) 356/2000/LSGD dated 23-12-2000 that rules regarding family pension (Rule 90 Part III KSR) will not be extended to these provisional hands now regularised.

17. The argument of the petitioners to allow him all service benefits from the date of entry in service as temporary hand wil