High Court of Kerala
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ.
A. Mohammed Basheer, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Retired)
Versus
State of Kerala represented by its Chief Secretary Government Secretariat & Others
O.P. (KAT) Nos. 770 & 1570 of 2013
Decided On : 28-10-2014
BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, J.
1. The O.P. (KAT) No. 770 of 2013 has been filed challenging Ext.P1 order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal dismissing T.A. No. 365 of 2012 (W.P. (C) No. 4568 of 2005). O.P. (KAT) No. 1570 of 2013 has been filed challenging Annexure A1(a) order of the said Tribunal dismissing T.A. No. 5635 of 2012 (W.P. (C) No. 9467 of 2010). The question that arises for consideration and decision in both these cases is one and the same. Therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The brief facts necessary for disposing of these Original Petitions are stated as follows:-
"The Petitioner in O.P. (KAT) No. 770 of 2013 joined the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short, the KSRTC) as a Reserve Conductor on the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission on 26-03-1974. While working there as a Second Grade Conductor, he was relieved from the KSRTC on 21-06-1981 for joining the Kerala Police Department as a Probationary Sub Inspector of Police as selected by the Kerala Public Service Commission. Accordingly, he joined the said post in the Police Department on 22-06-1981. He had retired from the Police Department as a Deputy Superintendent of Police on 30-09-2005. He had moved the Government for reckoning the service rendered by him from 26-03-1974 to 21-06-1981 in the KSRTC as qualifying service for computing pensionary benefits. But that representation was rejected by the Government by communication dated 18-01-2005. The challenge against that communication and the prayer for reckoning the service rendered by the petitioner in the KSRTC as qualifying service for pension were rejected by the Tribunal by the impugned Ext.P1 order. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred the Original Petition before this Court."
3. The petitioner in O.P. (KAT) No. 1570 of 2013 joined the Khadi and Village Industries Board as a Lower Division Clerk on 05-09-1981 on the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission. He had continued as such till 23-12-1983. He joined the Revenue Department as a Lower Division Clerk on the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission on 24-12-1983. He had retired as a Deputy Tahsildar from the Revenue Department on 31-03-2010. He had filed a representation for counting the service rendered by him in the Khadi and Village Industries Board also as qualifying service for pensionary benefits. But, that was rejected by orders dated 14-07-2009 and 22-02-2010. The challenge against those orders and the prayer for counting the service rendered by the petitioner in the Khadi and Village Industries Board as qualifying service for pension were rejected by the Tribunal. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred the Original Petition before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC. Lengthy arguments have been advanced by both the sides. We have also perused the records.
5. The petitioner in O.P. (KAT) No. 770 of 2013 had rendered service in the KSRTC from 26-03-1974 to 21-06-1981. The petitioner in O.P. (KAT) No. 1570 of 2013 had rendered service in the Khadi and Village Industries Board from 05-09-1981 to 23-12-1983. The appointments of the petitioners in the KSRTC and in the Khadi and Village Industries Board were on the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission. Their appointments in the Police Department and in the Revenue Department were also on the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission. The service in the KSRTC and in the Khadi and Village Industries Board are pensionable. The service with the Police Department and with the Revenue Department are also pensionable. The question is as to whether the service rendered by the petitioners in the KSRTC and in the Khadi and Village Industries Board can be reckoned as qualifying service along with the service rendered by them in th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.