Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. K. NATARAJAN, MR. JOHNSON JOHN, JJ
STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
GIRIJADEVI T – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court decisions on pension issues rely on established precedents. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. data regarding superannuation and relevant rules were critical for case evaluation. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. review jurisdiction has specific limitations and is not for re-arguing points already settled. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. finality in court decisions reinforces the stability of legal interpretations. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. the review petition was dismissed with no grounds indicating error. (Para 11) |
O R D E R
Johnson John, J.
The review petitioners are the petitioners in the above O.P.(KAT).
2. As per judgment dated 20.06.2025, this Court dismissed the Original petition filed by the State of Kerala and others finding that the issue raised in the Original Petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Chandran v. State of Kerala [2023 KHC 577].
3. It is contended in the review petition that this Court solely relied on the judgment in Chandran’s case supra without considering the relevant rules and that the respondents have not stated the actual date of their superannuation and as to how many months they continued after the date of their superannuation being teachers, in view of Rule 60(c) o
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
