Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
M. Koyakutty – Appellant
Versus
Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board, Thiruvananthapuram, Rep. By Its Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to rejected request for reckoning prior service for pension. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. discussion on applicability of kerala service rules and prior service benefits. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. determination of whether esi corporation qualifies as a public sector undertaking. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. legal principles on vested rights and the impact of retrospective amendments. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. outcome of the petition with directives for pension adjustments. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The Petitioner is a retired employee of the Respondent No.1/Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board who retired from the service on 31.10.2008 while he was working as its Accounts Officer. The Petitioner joined the service of the Respondent No.1 on 13.06.1983. Prior to the joining of service of the Respondent No.1, the Petitioner had been working in the Respondent No.3/ESI Corporation for the period from 13.06.1978 to 10.06.1983. The Representations of the Petitioner to the Respondent No.1 to reckon the service of the Petitioner in the Respondent No.3 for fixation of pension and pensionary benefits were rejected by the Secretary of the Respondent No.1 as per Exts.P4 and P5. The Pet
Retrospective amendments to pension rules cannot divest vested rights of retired employees regarding pension calculations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the entire length of service from the date of initial appointment should be considered for the purposes of fixation of pensionary benefits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to follow Rule 11(2) of the Pension Rules and the Full Bench Judgement in determining the eligibility for pensionary benefits.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the benefits of pension to daily wagers should be calculated from the date of their initial appointments, as per the Government Resolution dat....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of employees to have their past services counted for pensionary benefits, as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and ....
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....
Pension rights depend on the fulfillment of predetermined conditions, and cabinet decisions lack enforceability without formal executive orders.
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
