J U D G M E N T

The issues in this case are edificed on the same factual pleadings and the reliefs sought for are also similar, if not identical. I, therefore, dispose of them jointly through this judgment.

2. The allegation of the petitioners in these cases is that a disparity has been drawn between the persons who retired prior to 01.01.2016 and thereafter, because the multiplication factor under the formula with respect to pensionary benefits has been fixed arbitrarily to be 2.25 for those who retired after 01.01.2016; while it was 2.57 who retired prior to that date.

3. The petitioners say that a similar situation arose relating to the revision in the year 2006, which had been rectified by the Government through order bearing G.O.(P)No.230/2012/Fin. dated 19.04.2012. They assert that, therefore, Government is now obligated to consider their cases also on par with the afore Government Order; and allege that that the orders impugned in these cases have been issued without even considering the same.

4. I have heard Sri.M.S.Radhakrishnan Nair – learned counsel for the petitioners in these cases and Smt.Sarojini K.G – learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

5.