K.Unnikrishna Pillai vs The Travancore Devaswom Board
2022 Latest Caselaw 10597 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
     FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 29TH ASWINA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022
PETITIONER :-

             K.UNNIKRISHNA PILLAI,
             WATCHER TDB (RETIRED), RESIDING AT VISHNU BHAVANAM,
             EDAVANASSERY, MYNAGAPPALLY P.O,
             KOLLAM DISTRICT- 690 519

             BY ADV R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI


RESPONDENTS :-

     1       THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
             DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS, NANTHANCODE,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 003

     2       THE COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
             DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS, NANTHANCODE,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 003.

     3       THE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
             TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, DEVASWOM HEADQUARTERS,
             NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003.

             BY ADV SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN, SC, TDB


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   21.10.2022,   THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

                                       -: 2 :-


                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 21st day of October, 2022

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P5 as illegal and arbitrary.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to pay the pension and pension arrears and DCRG with 12% interest from 1.6.2021 till the date of payment to the petitioner."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Travancore

Devaswom Board.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the petitioner had been appointed as Part time

Kazhakam on 17.7.1986 and he entered service in the

Amachira Devasom in Thevalakkara Sub Group of

Karunagappally Group under the Travancore Devaswom Board.

While so, he was granted promotion as Full Time Kazhakam on

1.7.1990. From 1.7.1990 to 31.10.1991 the petitioner was

working as Departmental Nominee in a Karazhma post in the WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

Puliyankulangara Devaswom. It is submitted that the

petitioner retired from service on 31.5.2021 while working as

Watcher in the Chirakkara Devaswom. The learned counsel for

the petitioner submits that Exts.P2 and P3 would show that the

service of the petitioner as Departmental Nominee has been

regularised and entered in his service book. However, after he

retired from service, Ext.P5 proceedings had been issued by

the Accounts Officer seeking a clarification from the Board

whether the period from 1.7.1990 to 1.11.1991 is to be

reckoned as regular service. The learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7

representation before the Board pointing out the factual

aspects of the matter. It is contended that the same has not

been answered and that the petitioner has not been paid his

retirement benefits by the respondents on account of the issue

with regard to the counting of his service as Departmental

Nominee in a Karazhma post.

4. A counter affidavit has been placed on record by the

1st respondent. It is admitted that the petitioner entered

service on 17.7.1986 and retired on 31.5.2021. It is submitted WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

that on verification of records, some defects were found in the

pension and the said defects have been cured and steps for

sanctioning and disbursal of pensionary benefits are complete.

However, on verification of the pension book and other

records, the Accounts Officer had pointed out that the period

from 1.7.1990 to 31.10.1991 is recorded as Karazhma service

and that clarification was sought with regard to the counting of

the said period as qualifying service. It is submitted that for

the purpose of time bound higher grade and pay revisions, the

regular service of the petitioner is reckoned to have started

only from 1.11.1991. It is stated that on the basis of the query

raised by the Accounts Officer, Ext.R1(a) remarks of the

Finance and Accounts Officer was recorded that the Board has

not passed any orders with regard to the counting of the

service as Departmental Nominee in a Karazhma vacancy and

that therefore, a decision has to be taken by the Board with

regard to counting of the said service.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced and in

view of the facts as admitted in the counter affidavit, I notice

that the petitioner was appointed as Part time Kazhakam in WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

1986 and was appointed as Full Time Kazhakam on 1.7.1990.

From 1.7.1990 to 31.10.1991, the petitioner had admittedly

worked as Departmental Nominee in a Karazhma post. If that

be so, I am of the opinion that the contention that the said

period cannot be reckoned as qualifying service and is to be

treated only as Karazhma service cannot be accepted for the

simple reason that the petitioner was never a Karazhma

employee and that he had been deputed by the Board to work

against a Karazhma post as a Departmental Nominee.

In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion

that the opinion raised in Ext.R1(a) communication cannot be

accepted. However, in view of the submission made by the

learned counsel for the respondents that there are several such

cases pending consideration of the Board and that this will

have far reaching consequences, there will be a direction to

the Board to consider and pass appropriate orders on the issue

of counting of service of Departmental Nominees in Karazhma

posts and pass a general order on the same, taking note of

what is stated above. Appropriate orders shall be passed

within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

copy of this judgment. The retirement benefits due to the

petitioner shall be appropriately refixed and orders issued and

amounts disbursed within a period of two months thereafter.

The regular pension, commutation benefits as well as the

DCRG of the petitioner shall be calculated and disbursed to

him within a period of three months.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/21.10.2022 WP(C) NO.29497 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29497/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.7.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ROC. NO. 15220/08/MISC DATED 19.2.2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22.9.2010 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.1/1/2014 DATED 1.1.2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.3.2022 FROM THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DA.NO.6596/2021/D1, DATED 13.5.2022 OF THE DEVASWOM ACCOUNTS OFFICER

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.6.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

Exhibit R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REMARKS OF FINANCE & ACCOUNTS OFFICER DATED 25.7.2022.