IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 10207 of 2006(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- P.S.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.LATE MR.SANKARAN, ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RETD.), KSEB, PANIKKASSERY HOUSE, KUNDALIYOOR.P.O, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.MOHAMMED SHIRAZ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KSEB, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KSEB, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. R1 TO 3 BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB SRI.PULIKOOL ABUBACKER, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.11.2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: vk WP(C).No. 10207 of 2006(M) ---------------------------------- APPENDIX -------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF ORDER NO.PA.IX PPO 25367 ® (PAVI) DATED 15.05.2004 OF 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 09.11.2004 OF PETITIONER. EXT.P3. COPY OF B.O. NO.461/2001 DATED 23.02.2001. EXT.P4. COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.AO/PA/GI/3/2001 DATED 21.03.2001 EXT.P5. COPY OF ORDER NO.LAS 1/3026/05 DATED 14.10.2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 10207 of 2006 ================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a retired employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board. His grievance in this writ petition is regarding computation of his retirement benefits. He retired from service after 1.7.1998. According to the petitioner, the petitioner's retirement benefits have to be calculated in accordance with clause 11 of Ext.P3 Board Order, which reads thus: “11) For computing the ten months' emoluments for the purpose of average emoluments for pension, in respect of employees who retired from service on 01.07.1998 or after and who, during part of the said period of 10 months, drew pay in the pre-revised scale, their pay in pre-revised scale may be enhanced notionally by adding DA at 1510 points of AICPI admissible to serving employees as on 01.01.1996. If any drop in existing pension occurs after the above exercise, such drop shall be protected as personal allowance not to be absorbed in future increase in Dearness Relief.” The petitioner submits that his retirement benefits have not been calculated in accordance with clause 11. The petitioner filed a representation in respect of the same. This Court, by judgment in W.P. (C).No.273/2005, directed the Board to consider the petitioner's representation. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P5 order has been passed, wherein the stand taken is that the said provision is not applicable to the petitioner, since the petitioner was on leave without allowances for accepting employment abroad for the period from 4.10.1993 to 15.9.1998 and he rejoined after leave on 16.9.1998. According to the - : 2 :- Board, the said clause is applicable to serving employees of the Board. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P5. According to him, this stand in Ext.P5 is incorrect. Clause 11 in Ext.P3 does not stipulate that it is not applicable to the employees, who were on leave without allowances. According to the petitioner, a person on leave is also a serving employee. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, in which, it is not disputed that while computing the retirement benefits of the petitioner, clause 11 has not been applied. But they support the impugned order 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The term “serving employees” in Ext.P3 qualifies “DA at 1510 points of AICPI admissible to”. That means for calculation of retirement benefits to persons who have retired from service on or after 1.7.1998 and, who, during any part of the said period of ten months, drew pay in the pre-revised scale, their pay in the pre-revised scale may be enhanced notionally by adding DA at 1510 points admissible to serving employees as on 1.1.1996. As such, the petitioner could not have been denied the benefits of clause 11 on the ground that he was not a serving employee as on 1.1.1996. Therefore, Ext.P5 order is clearly against clause 11. Accordingly, - : 3 :- Ext.P5 is quashed. The respondents are directed to recompute the petitioner's retirement benefits in accordance with clause 11 of Ext.P3 and disburse arrears due to him in respect thereof, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge