Anil K. Narendran, J.

1. The appellant is petitioner in W.P.(C)No.20298/2008. The said Writ Petition was filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Exhibit P2 Government order to the extent of denying the reckoning of 50% of the part-time contingent service rendered by the appellant as qualifying service for pension and for other consequential reliefs.

2. On 31.12.2004, the appellant retired from service on superannuation, while working as Upper Division Clerk (UDC) in the Collegiate Education Department. Initially, she entered service in the erstwhile Panchayat Common Service as Part-Time Librarian in Kumaranallur Panchayat on 17.3.1978. Later, she was transferred to Parassala Panchayat. While working at Parassala Panchayat, she was promoted as Bill Collector on 14.11.1984, which was a full time post in that service. Therefore, the appellant who was a part-time contingent employee in the Panchayat service was absorbed in regular service on 14.11.1984.

3. While the appellant was continuing as Bill Collector in the Panchayat service she got appointment as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in the Collegiate Education Department, as advised by the Kerala Public Service Commission. She joined service in the Collegiate Education Department as LDC on 9.5.1986 and later she was promoted as UDC. While continuing as such, she retired from service on 31.12.2004, on superannuation.

4. In Exhibit P1 Pension Payment Order issued by the 3rd respondent, the date of commencement of service of the appellant is shown as 9.5.1986 and the total length of her qualifying service is taken as 18 years, 7 months and 23 days, rounded to 19 years. According to the appellant, her prior service in the Panchayat service, both part-time contingent service as well as full time service after her absorption in regular service, are to be counted as qualifying service for pension. Therefore, in addition to her prior service as Bill Collector in the Panchayat service, 50% of her part- time contingent service should also be counted as qualifying service for pension.

5. Based on a representation dated 21.3.2005 submitted by the appellant, the 1st respondent by Exhibit P2 communication dated 17.10.2005 directed the 2nd respondent to reckon the service rendered by her as Bill Collector in the Panchayat service as qualifying service for pension, but rejected the request to reckon 50% of her part-time contingent service as qualifying service for pension. According to the appellant, going by Exhibit P3 Government letter addressed to the Director of Panchayat, while calculating the pensionary benefits of those Panchayat employees who are having contingent service in Panchayat prior to their appointment in regular service, 50% of their part-time contingent service should be reckoned as qualifying service for pension, in view of G.O.(P)No.356/94/Fin. dated 27.5.1994 and G.O.(P) No.506/95/Fin. dated 20.8.1995. Therefore, she submitted Exhibit P4 representation before the 1st respondent in order to reckon for pension 50% of her part-time contingent service for the period from 17.3.1978 to 13.11.1984. Thereafter, she has approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.20298/2008 seeking various reliefs.

6. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent contending that, though the Government vide G.O. (Ms.) No.25/87/LAD. dated 3.2.1987 declared the employees of Panchayat service as Government employees with effect from 3.2.1987, the contingent employees continue as Panchayat employees. Going by G.O. (P)No.193/04/Fin. dated 20.4.2004, the prior Panchayat service of the Government employees can be reckoned as qualifying service for pension. But, the said Government order is not applicable to part-time contingent employees of Panchayat service. The 1st respondent further contended that, as per Rule 14A of Part III of the Kerala Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the KSR') contingent employees absorbed in regular establishment will be allowed to count 50% of