IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2010 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28104 of 2005(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- N. BALAKRISHNAN, ANJALI, 23/1202, BYEPASS ROAD, THIRUVANNUR, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) KERALA, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-39. R1 BY ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB. R2 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 28104/2005-U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LETTER P12/PENA/653/BD/01-02/1042 DATED 17/10/2001 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PA.GI.1/XX/II/2002 DATED 09/01/2003 FROM THE BOARD. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE G.O.(P)NO.228/2001/FIN. DATED 02/02/2002. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27/08/2003 IN O.P. NO. 14135/2001. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A2-5809/00 DATED 06/05/2003. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 11/08/2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.28104 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from the service of the Government of Kerala as an Assistant Controller of the Legal Metrology Department. Prior to joining the Legal Metrology Department of the Government of Kerala, the petitioner had two years' service in the Kerala State Electricity Board-the 1st respondent herein. The petitioner wanted the Government of Kerala to reckon the past service of the petitioner in the K.S.E.B. for the purpose of calculating his retirement benefits. The 3rd respondent insisted that the same can be done only if the 1st respondent deposits the pro-rata pension contribution, which they had deducted from the salary of the petitioner, to the Government. As evidenced by Ext.P2, the 1st respondent W.P.(C)No.28104 of 2005 -2- takes the stand that they will not pay pro-rata pension contribution to the Government since the Board reckons the past service rendered by its employees in the Government or State owned autonomous bodies for pension without insisting on payment of the pro-rata pension contribution from the Government. The petitioner submits that in so far as the 1st respondent had deducted from the petitioner's salary pro- rata pension contribution the 1st respondent has no justification to retain the same and the 1st respondent is bound to pay the pro-rata pension contribution deducted from the petitioner's salary to the 3rd respondent. 2. No counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent. But the Government Pleader points out from an order handed over to me, that for the same relief the petitioner has approached the Kerala Lok Ayukta by filing Complaint No.949/2003 and the Lok Ayukta had held as follows: When a Government employee joined service of the Kerala State electricity Board and retires from service of the Board, the service rendered by that employee under the Government will be added to the service rendered by him in the W.P.(C)No.28104 of 2005 -3- Board in computing pensionary benefits. Rule specifically provide for tacking on the service rendered under the government to the service rendered in the Board for computing pension. Likewise it is argued by the petitioner that an employee of the Electricity Board while joining the service of the State must have the right to get his service rendered under the Board reckoned for pensionary benefits from the Government. This argument is quite attractive. But it has no legal sanction. No rule allows the employee to tack on the service rendered by him in the electricity Board to the subsequent service rendered under the Government for computing pensionary benefits. Electricity Board has also taken the stand that no pension contribution of an ex-employee will be paid to the Government when he joins the service under the Government. In this situation the reply given by the Accountant General to the petitioner's request that petitioner's service under the Electricity Board cannot be considered for fixing the pension on retirement from Government service is unassailable. Accountant General's reply dated 4-4-2003 is complete answer to the petitioner's claim. We do not find any ground to direct the Government to reckon the service rendered by the petitioner under the Electricity Board for computing his pensionary benefits on retirement from Government service. Petition is dismissed. He also points out that the petitioner has not chosen to disclose the said fact in the writ petition. In view of the fact that the petitioner has suffered an adverse order from the Kerala Lok Ayukta which was rendered as early as on 28.06.2005 and that he has not chosen to challenge the same, I do not think that the petitioner can invoke the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the W.P.(C)No.28104 of 2005 -4- Constitution of India, that too without disclosing the fact that he had suffered an adverse order from the Kerala Lok Ayukta. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/