The court emphasized the obligation of the respondent to consider and decide on pension revision applications of retired employees based on relevant evidence and legal precedent.

JUDGMENT :

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J.:— The petitioners herein are retired employees of the Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Limited (KSEDC), a Government of Kerala undertaking. According to the 1st petitioner, on the date of superannuation on 28.02.2011, he was working as the General Manager in the Area Sales Office at Ernakulam. The 2nd petitioner on the other hand, at the time of his retirement on 30.4.2010, was the Sales Manager in Marketing office at Calcutta. According to the petitioners, they had opted for the Employees Pension Scheme, 1995 and had been regularly paying contribution.

2. The petitioners approached this Court contending that they had filed Exts.P2 and P3 applications seeking revision of pension on actual wages supported with an undertaking from their employer. They rely on Ext. P1 letter issued by the Additional Central PF Commissioner, HQ (Pension) to substantiate their contention that they are entitled to higher pension. Their grievance is that the respondents have not taken any action on Exts.P2 and P3.

3. Sri. K.K. Sathish, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that his only prayer before this Court is to direct the respondent to take up Exts.P2 and P3 and pass appropriate orders. He would also refer to the decision of this Court in Sasikumar P. v. Union of India [ILR (2019) 1 Ker 614] to support his submissions.

4. Adv. Nita N.S., the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that Ext. P1 may not strictly apply to the petitioners. However, the learned Standing Counsel submits that there cannot be any impediment in considering Exts.P2 and P3 and if Ext. P1 is applicable necessary orders can be passed on merits.

5. Having considered the facts and circumstances and the submissions made across the bar, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3, in the light of Ext. P1 and the directions issued in Sasikumar (supra), expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this Writ Petition along with the judgment before the respondent to ensure compliance.