Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, C. JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
SHAKKEENA M., W/O. BASHEER – Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT and Ors. – Respondents
O.P (K.A.T) No.190 of 2023
Decided On : 28-04-2023
Kerala Administrative Tribunal - Seeking direction to pass orders - Petitioner had approached Kerala Administrative Tribunal in O.A. seeking a direction to pass orders on representation submitted by her - Petitioner superannuates from service and therefore if the decision is taken subsequent to retirement, the very purpose of representation itself would be defeated. (Para 2)
Finding of the Court: Court are satisfied that since the Tribunal has already decided to direct disposal of representation within two months and since petitioner retires from service decision, so directed to be taken, ought to be taken prior to her superannuation, as otherwise the very purpose of application as well as representation would be defeated.
Result: Petition disposed of
JUDGMENT :
(Bechu Kurian Thomas, J.)
1. Petitioner had approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.394/2023 seeking a direction to pass orders on the representation submitted by her dated 21.11.2022. By the impugned order dated 03.04.2023, the Tribunal disposed of the Original Application directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of the representation produced as Annexure-A6 before the Tribunal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
2. Sri.Terry V.James, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 22.05.2023, petitioner superannuates from service and therefore if the decision is taken subsequent to the retirement, the very purpose of representation itself would be defeated.
3. We have heard the learned Government Pleader also.
4. Having regard to the limited relief now sought for, we are satisfied that since the Tribunal has already decided to direct disposal of the representation within two months and since the petitioner retires from service on 22.05.2023, the decision, so directed to be taken, ought to be taken prior to her superannuation, as otherwise the very purpose of the application as well as the representation would be defeated.
5. In the above circumstances, in modification of the order of the Tribunal dated 03.04.2023 in O.A.(EKM) No.394/2023, we direct that the representation shall be considered and disposed of after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before 18.05.2023 positively. It is clarified that under no circumstances shall the decision be delayed beyond 18.05.2023.
The original petition is disposed of as above.
The court mandates government consideration of employee retirement age changes, emphasizing proper representation and timely decision-making by authorities.
The court emphasizes the mandatory duty of authorities to address representations under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 in a timely manner.
Petitioners entitled to notional increments post-superannuation based on prior conduct, as per binding judicial precedent.
The principle of mandamus can be invoked to compel public authorities to perform their duties in a timely manner.
Superannuated employees are entitled to notional increments due despite retirement, with the court mandating pension refixation and arrears payment based on established legal precedents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
