Kerala High Court
Sobhana.M.P vs The State Of Kerala on 13 September, 2024
1
W.P.(C) No.35390 of 2019
2024:KER:70239
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 22ND BHADRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 35390 OF 2019
PETITIONER:
SOBHANA.M.P
AGED 66 YEARS, W/O.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI,
SUDHARSHANAM, THATTAYIL.P.O.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
K.V.ANIL KUMAR
RADHIKA S.ANIL
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
(A AND E), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
DD OFFICE, KOLLAM-691001.
4 THE MANAGER,
R.V.V. HIGH SCHOOL,
VALAKOM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691532.
BY ADV.
SMT.K.B.SONY - GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C) No.35390 of 2019
2024:KER:70239
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.35390 of 2019
------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of September, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was working as a teacher in an aided school
from 02.06.1986 till 14.07.2002, as a temporary hand. From
15.07.2002, the petitioner was made permanent. She continued
in service till 02.06.2007. However, from 03.06.2007, the
petitioner did not turn up for duty.
2. In such circumstances, Ext.P1 proceedings was issued
by the 4th respondent Manager, by terminating the services of the
petitioner from the school. It is to be noticed straight away that,
in the last paragraph of Ext.P1 proceedings, it is
specifically noticed that the termination of the service of the
petitioner is without prejudice to her right to avail the pensionary
benefits.
3. Later, the petitioner applied for the pensionary benefits
during 2013. Ext.P3 is the fixation carried out as regards the
pension. By Ext.P3, it is observed that the petitioner's pension is
fixed with effect from 10.03.2013, however, noticing that for the
period from 02.06.2007 to 09.03.2013, sanction from the
2024:KER:70239
Government is required for disbursing the pension to the
petitioner.
4. Against the above proceedings, the petitioner
submitted a detailed representation at Ext.P6 before the
Government. The Government issued Ext.P7 refusing to extend
the pensionary benefits for the period from 02.06.2007 to
09.03.2013.
5. The captioned writ petition is filed challenging the
proceedings at Ext.P7 issued by the 1st respondent.
6. I have heard Sri.K.V.Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt.K.B.Sony, learned Government Pleader.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out to the
proceedings at Ext.P1, by which, the petitioner was terminated
from service, without prejudice to the pensionary benefits, to
contend that the refusal to extend the pension from 02.06.2007
to 09.03.2013 was without any justification.
8. Smt.K.B.Sony, the learned Government Pleader, on the
other hand, points out with reference to the counter affidavit filed,
that the petitioner has not challenged Ext.P1 order, and so much
so, the petitioner is not entitled for the benefits.
9. I have considered the rival submissions as well as the
2024:KER:70239
connected records.
10. The short issue arising for consideration in this writ
petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled for the
pensionary benefits for the period from 02.06.2007 to
09.03.2013. The admitted facts are that the petitioner was
working as a teacher in an aided school. On account of her
unauthorised absence, she was terminated from service by Ext.P1.
The fact that the petitioner has not challenged the order at Ext.P1
is not in dispute. However, a perusal of Ext.P1 would show that
the termination is without prejudice to the petitioner's eligibility
for the pensionary benefits.
11. It is also to be seen that, ultimately by Ext.P3, the
petitioner is extended the pension with effect from 10.03.2013,
with reference to an application filed by the petitioner. But then
the question arises as to the period prior to 10.03.2013, i.e., from
02.06.2007 (the date on which the petitioner is terminated from
service) to 09.03.2013. A perusal of Ext.P1, as noticed earlier,
shows that even going by the said order, the petitioner is entitled
for the benefits. When that be so, there is no justification for
having denied the pensionary benefits for the period from
02.06.2007 to 09.03.2013. This is especially so since, as noticed
2024:KER:70239
earlier, the petitioner has been given pension from 10.03.2013.
In such circumstances, I allow this writ petition by setting
aside the impugned order at Ext.P7 issued by the 1 st respondent.
There will be a direction to the respondents to disburse the
pension for the period from 02.06.2007 to 09.03.2013, as
originally applied for by the petitioner, within a period of six
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON
JUDGE
anm
2024:KER:70239
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35390/2019
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TERMINATION ORDER
NO.4/2011 - 12 DATED 23.9.2011 ISSUED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
GIVEN BY DR.V.CHITHARARAJAN, VRINDAVAN
AYURVEDA NURSING HOME,MAVELIKARA DATED
20.8.2009.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
GIVEN BY DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,
DISTRICT MEDICAL BOARD, KOLLAM DATED
15.10.2009.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
GIVEN BY DR.M.M.BASHEER, RETD. DMO DATED
7.7.2013.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT
DATED 6.6.2013 GIVEN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER
NO.111356567 DATED 6.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER
NO. P-07/2101390914/2/P/13/10/70193058
DATED 6.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 9.7.2013
GIVEN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
6.3.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
