IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21624 of 2009(W) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.S.LOOKOSE,L KADUNKAL (HOUSE) KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, (SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT K.S.E.B(RETD) BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE K.S.E.B. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) K.S.E.B. VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB R1 & R2 MR.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21624/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 16.10.06. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 13.8.07 IN WPC. 18372/07. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 23.5.08. IN WA. 546/08. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 28.1.09 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE NOTE REGARDING THE RECKONING OF PREVIOUS SERVICE. P6:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 26.2.09 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE COC NO.94/09 WAS CLOSED AS PER JUDGMENT DTD. 4.3.09. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R2(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 28.3.09. R2(b):- COPY OF THE B.O. DTD. 1.9.05. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 21624 OF 2009 (W) ===================== Dated this the 10th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner joined the KSEB as a Junior Assistant on 4/7/1978. He was promoted as Senior Assistant in 1981. From 14/4/1992 onwards, he was on leave without allowance for employment abroad and he continued as such till 12/10/2006. It would also appear that from 26/10/2006, petitioner was on leave preparatory to retirement. Accordingly, leave was granted and he was superannuated from service on 30/11/2006. 2. Claiming his terminal benefits, he approached this Court resulting in Ext.P2 judgment where the Board was directed to pay admissible benefits due to the petitioner on his superannuation. It is stated that finally Board issued Ext.P4 proceedings on 28/1/2009, granting minimum pension of Rs.2400 plus Dearness Allowance w.e.f. 1/12/2006 and DCRG of Rs.26,334/-. 3. In this writ petition, petitioner mainly contends that his prior service under the Government of India was not reckoned for fixing his qualifying service. According to him, if the prior service WPC 21624/09 :2 : is reckoned, he will have a qualifying service of atleast 20 years and his pensionary benefits are liable to be revised on that basis. Petitioner also submits that by Ext.P5, the details of the prior service was submitted to the Board as early as in 1992 and that such details furnished as per Ext.P5 should have been accepted and acted upon. 4. However, what is disclosed in the counter affidavit is that the Board did not have a scheme for counting prior service as sought for by the petitioner until such a proposal was sanctioned by the Board in the meeting held on 22/8/2005. It is stated that thereafter the Board issued Ext.R2(b) order dated 1/9/2005 which interalia provided that a time limit of one year from 1/9/2005 will be allowed to existing employees to apply for counting their past services, if any, for the purpose of pension. This order makes it clear that request made after the time limit will not be entertained. It is the specific case of the respondents that a request as contemplated in Ext.R2(b) was not made by the petitioner within the time limit. Nothing has been placed on record to prove this assertion of the Board to be incorrect. WPC 21624/09 :3 : 5. Evidently counting of past service of an employee is possible only if the rules provided for such a benefit. In this case, though the Rule provided for counting of previous service, one of the conditions for such concession is that request should be made within one year as provided in Ext.R2(b). In the absence of any request having been made by the petitioner as provided in Ext.R2(b), the Board order referred to above, I am not in a position to accept the case set up by the petitioner and find fault with the Board. 6. Yet another grievance of the petitioner is that after rejoining the service, he ought to have been promoted to the post of Senior Superintendent w.e.f. 19/10/2006, on which date, his juniors were promoted. He relies on the provisions of Appendix XII-A of KSR in support of this contention. It is seen that the petitioner has raised this claim before the 2nd respondent by filing Ext.P6. Although this representation contains several other claims, I feel the claim of the petitioner for promotion as above needs to be addressed. 7. Therefore, while negativing the claim of the petitioner WPC 21624/09 :4 : for counting previous service in the Government of India as qualifying service for pension, it is directed that his grievance that he ought to have been promoted on 19/10/2006 as Senior Superintendent raised in Ext.P6 shall be considered by the 2nd respondent. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp