[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Kerala State Road Transport ... vs M. Shanavaskhan on 16 December, 2025
W.A.No.1616 of 2022
: 1 :-
2025:KER:95828
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
WA NO. 1616 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2021 IN WP(C)
NO.2209 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 IN WPC:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT
BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
2 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION)
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT
BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
3 DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
KSRTC, PEROORKADA UNIT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695008
4 DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
KSRTC, NEDUMANGAD UNIT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695541
BY ADV SHRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC, KSRTC
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
M. SHANAVASKHAN
NEW FIELD, RAVEENDRAN MASH NAGAR KALLUVETTANLUZHY,
KULATUPOUZHA KOLLAM DISTRICT (CONDUCTOR,
PEROORKADA, RETIRED ON 30/9/2012), PIN - 691310
BY ADV SHRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
11.12.2025, THE COURT ON 16.12.2025 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1616 of 2022
: 2 :-
2025:KER:95828
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
&
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,JJ.
-------------------------------------
W.A. No. 1616 of 2022
---------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of December 2025
JUDGMENT
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,J
This intra-court appeal is filed by the respondents in W.P.(C)
No.2209/2017, challenging the judgment dated 22.11.2021,
allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent herein.
2. The respondent herein/writ petitioner joined the Kerala
State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as
'KSRTC', for short) as a conductor on 13.06.1990 and retired on
30.09.2012. He is aggrieved by Exts.P3 and P10 orders passed by
the KSRTC denying him pensionary benefits on the ground that he
is not having the qualifying service for getting pension. According to
the respondent, the period of Leave Without Allowance (hereinafter
referred to as 'LWA', for short), which he had availed from
24.08.2009 to 02.07.2010, has wrongly been omitted by the KSRTC
while reckoning the qualifying service for getting pension and if the
same is also included, he will be entitled for pension. It is hence,
aggrieved by Exts.P3 and P10 orders passed by the KSRTC, the
respondent filed the afore writ petition seeking the following reliefs:
: 3 :-
2025:KER:95828
"(i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or orders calling
for the records leading to Exhibits P3 and P10 orders and quash the
same in so far imposing a condition to the effect that the leave
without allowance sanctioned to the petitioner from 24/8/2009 will
not count for any pensionary benefits.
(ii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to treat the period of
leave without allowance availed prior to 10/6/2010 will count for
pensionary benefits as held in Exhibits P4 and P5 judgments of this
Honourable Court.
(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or
direction directing the respondents to re-compute the qualifying
service duly reckoning the period of leave without allowance
sanctioned to the petitioner from 24/8/2009 to 10/6/2010 for
pension and sanction eligible pension and pensionary benefits due
to the petitioner immediately."
3. The learned Single Judge by judgment dated 22.11.2021,
allowed the writ petition and directed the appellants to treat the
period from 24.08.2009 to 02.07.2010 for qualifying service for the
purpose of pension and otherwise, and grant the reliefs in
accordance with law. It is aggrieved by the said direction, the
respondents in the writ petition have preferred this writ appeal.
4. Heard Adv.Deepu Thankan, the learned standing counsel
appearing for the appellants and Adv.N.Sasidharan Unnithan, the
learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
5. The learned standing counsel for the appellants, by relying
on Ext.P11 circular issued by the KSRTC, contended that those
employees who have availed LWA without medical certificate and
those who have retired after 10.06.2010 are not entitled to
calculate the period of LWA as qualifying service for pension. He
: 4 :-
2025:KER:95828
also submitted that a person is entitled to get pension only for the
period in which he was drawing salary, and hence for the period
wherein no pay was granted, pension cannot be claimed.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent
supported the impugned judgment and contended that, there are
no grounds to interfere with it. He submitted that, the issue in this
case has already attained finality by the judgments of this Court in
Exts.P4 and P5, which is confirmed by the Apex Court by Ext.P6
order. He also argued that Ext.P11 circular is very clear and it would
show that LWA, without medical certificate availed prior to
10.06.2010, has to be treated as qualifying service for pension.
7. The short point that arises for consideration in this writ
appeal, is whether the respondent, who retired from service as
early as on 30.09.2012, is entitled to reckon the period of LWA
availed by him without medical certificate from 24.08.2009 to
02.07.2010, as qualifying service for pension and other benefits. It
is not in dispute that before amendment of Rule 26 of Part III of
KSR on 19.10.2009, all kinds of leave, with or without allowance
will be counted as qualifying service for pension. By the
amendment, Sub rule (b) was introduced to Rule 26 clarifying that
leave without allowance shall not be counted for pension, except
the leave without allowance availed on the basis of medical
: 5 :-
2025:KER:95828
certificate. It is a matter of record that consequent to the
amendment, the KSRTC issued Ext.P1 Circular dated 06.07.2010,
making the amendment applicable to the Corporation. But, in
Ext.P1, it was also stated that leave availed by the employees
without the support of the medical certificate prior to 10.06.2010
will not be counted as qualifying service for pension. It is not in
dispute that the said clause was quashed by this Court as per
Ext.P4 judgment and that the same was confirmed by a Division
Bench of this Court vide Ext.P5 judgment and thereafter, by the
Apex Court by Ext.P6 order. Thereafter, the KSRTC issued Ext.P11
Memorandum dated 27.12.2014 clarifying as to how LWA has to be
counted for service/pensionary benefits. Ext.P11 reads as follows:
"As per the reference 1st cited, the leave without allowances
availed by the retired employees were directed not to count
as qualifying service for pension.
The conditions in the above circular memorandum dated
6/7/2010 is hereby amended as follows, in order to
implement the judgment of the Honourable High Court.
The leave without allowance, without medical certificate
availed by the employees from 10.06.2010 and granted after
retirement from 10.06.2010 need not be treated as qualifying
service.
That is, the leave without allowance granted without
: 6 :-
2025:KER:95828
medical certificate prior to 10.06.2010 shall be treated as
qualifying service for pension subject to other conditions. "
8. It is thus clear from Ext.P11 also that LWA granted without
medical certificate prior to 10.06.2010 has to be treated as
qualifying service for pension. If so, in the light of the afore facts, it
can be stated without any doubt that the period from 24.08.2009 to
10.06.2010 (even though the respondent has availed LWA till
02.07.2010) has to be reckoned while calculating the qualifying
service for pension. This in turn means that the findings of the
learned Single Judge in afore lines cannot be faulted with. We find
that the present writ appeal filed by KSRTC is hence totally
misconceived and lacks merit. Hence, considering all the afore facts
and circumstances, including the fact that the respondent has
retired as early as in 2012 and is knocking the doors for getting
pension for all this period and also considering the hardships faced
by him, we are of the view that this Writ Appeal is to be dismissed
with cost to the respondent, quantified @ Rs.20,000/-, which we
hope will provide some succour to him.
Ergo, this writ appeal is dismissed with cost of
Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) to the respondent. The
appellants are granted 2 months time from today to comply with
: 7 :-
2025:KER:95828
the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge and pay the cost
as ordered.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
Judge
Sd/-
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN
Judge
dpk
