Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
Nakulan K.V. - Petitioner
Versus
Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit Rep. by its Registrar
WP (C) No. 1589 of 2024
Decided On : 03-04-2025
(A) Writ Jurisdiction - Pensionary Benefits - The petitioner sought to quash orders denying pension benefits for service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan from 03.01.1990 to 26.08.1997 - The Government clarified that service in Central Autonomous Bodies is not reckoned for pension - The petitioner argued that his service should be counted based on prior judgments. (Paras 1 - 17 )
(B) Legal Status of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan - The court recognized Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan as an autonomous body, not a Central Government entity, thus excluding its service from pension calculations. (Paras 15 - 17 )
(C) Interpretation of Service Rules - The court emphasized that the rules regarding pensionary benefits are clear and do not allow for prior service in Central Public Sector Undertakings to be counted. (Paras 15 - 17 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, an Associate Professor, retired from the University and sought pension benefits for prior service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, which was denied based on government rules.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petitioner's claim as the service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is not recognized for pension benefits under existing rules.
Issues: The main issues were whether the service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan qualifies for pension benefits and the legality of the government's decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan does not qualify for pension benefits as it is not considered service under the Central Government, reaffirming the clarity of the applicable rules.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner, who is an Associate Professor in Urdu and who retired from the services of the 1st respondent-Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit on 31.05.2020, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash Exts.P6 and P13 to the extent it denies pensionary benefits to the petitioner from 03.01.1990 to 26.08.1997 for the service rendered with Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan.
2. The petitioner joined service as Junior Lecturer in Government Brennen College, Thalassery on 26.09.1989. The petitioner continued in service till 02.01.1990. On 03.01.1990, the petitioner was appointed as Primary Teacher in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Madras. The petitioner served the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan till 26.08.1997.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner joined service as Lecturer in Government College, Malappuram on 27.08.1997 itself. The petitioner continued to work there till 21.12.1998. On 22.12.1998, the petitioner joined the 1st respondent- University as Lecturer. The petitioner retired from service on superannuation on 31.05.2020. The petitioner has continuous service from 26.09.1989 to 31.05.2020, though in different Government Institutions.
4. Though various service periods of the petitioner were reckoned for computation of his pension amount and other retiral benefits, the service rendered by the petitioner under the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan from 03.01.1990 to 26.08.1997 has not been reckoned for pensionary benefits. The petitioner therefore seeks to command the 1st respondent to reckon the prior service of the petitioner rendered in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan for counting as qualifying service for fixation of pension. 5. The petitioner approached this Court filing W.P.(C) No.28836/2021 for this purpose. This Court disposed of the said writ petition as per Ext.P11 judgment dated 01.06.2022 giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority of the Government, who will thereupon, evaluate the nature and constitution of the KVS to decide whether it would be outside the purview and rigour of the Central Autonomous Bodies or Central Public Sector Undertakings; and if it is so found, notwithstanding Ext.P15 order, the petitioner would be entitled to relief as has been sought for by him.
6. The petitioner thereupon filed Ext.P11 representation dated 13.06.2022 to the Secretary to Finance (Expenditure), Government of Kerala. The Government found that the rules of Government of India made for Central Government employees are not directly applicable to the employees of Autonomous Bodies and that the prior service in Central Public Sector Undertakings shall not be reckoned for pensionary benefits along with the service in the State Government Department and only the service in Central Government shall be reckoned as qualifying service for pensionary benefits. The petitioner seeks to set aside Ext.P13.
7. The petitioner states that in GO(P) No.171/99/H.Edn. Dated 21.12.1999 the Government of Kerala has stated that previous service, without any break as Lecturer, as equivalent in a University, College, National Laboratory, or other Scientific Organisations, eg. CSIR, ICAR, DRDO, UGC, ICSSR, ICHR and as a UGC Research Scientist, should be counted for placement of Lecturer in Senior Scale / Selection Grade provided that the qualifications for the post were not lower than the qualifications prescribed by the UGC for the post of Lecturer.
8. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in OP(KAT) No.25/2024 wherein it was held that employees who have retired as Trained Graduate Teachers from the office of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan are entitled to interest on the delayed payment of pensionary benefits, treating the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan as a Central Government Body.
9. The petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Hasia and others v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi and others [(1981) 1 SCC 722] to hold that Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is an instrumen
Service in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan is not recognized for pension benefits as it is an autonomous body, not a Central Government entity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that statutory provisions supersede executive orders, and the omission of specific entities from statutory rules can be decisive in determining eli....
Prior Central Government service may be recognized for pension benefits despite breaks in service under specific conditions.
Retrospective amendments to pension rules cannot divest vested rights of retired employees regarding pension calculations.
Recovery from pensionary benefits after prolonged tacit acceptance by the employer exposes the employer to equitable considerations of certainty in employee benefits.
prohibits State Government from interfering with the internal administration of the University in absence of any provision made in the Act itself the decision of the University itself that they will ....
Point of law: Service that was once considered for inclusion in the qualifying service for pension was the provisional service envisaged under Rule 9 (a) (i) of the KS&SSR - Although such provisional....
Eligibility for pension under the Old Pension Scheme is contingent on service in institutions receiving 100% grants before the cut-off date of 01.11.2005, with precedents acknowledging prior unaided ....
The court determined that prior service in a public sector cannot count as qualifying service for pension benefits under applicable laws.
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
