IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23696 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SASI N.N., DRIVER, H.C.NO.9180, A.R.M.T., ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA-683 101. 2. KURAIKOSE T.T., DRIVER, H.C.E-9666, A.R.M.T., ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA-683 101. 3. VIJAYAN N.V., DRIVER, PC NO.9936, A.R.M.T., ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA-683 101. 4. M.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, DRIVER, H.C.NO.7934, A.R.M.T., KOCHI CITY, KOCHI-682 001. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 101. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, KOCHI-682 001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 23696 OF 2010 (J) ===================== Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are Drivers belonging to both HC and PC categories in the Police Department. 2. Their claim is for reckoning of their previous military service for service benefits. According to them, similar claim has already been upheld by this Court as per Exts.P7 to P9 judgments which were implemented by the Department by Ext.P10 order passed by the 2nd respondent. However, it is stated that in so far as the 4th petitioner, who claimed the benefit is concerned, without adverting to the above, it has been rejected by Ext.P12 and the claim made by the remaining petitioners are also pending consideration. 3. On going through Ext.P12, I am inclined to agree with the counsel for the petitioners that the above order has been passed without adverting to the relevant considerations. 4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P12 and directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P11 series of representations made by petitioners 1 to 3 for WPC No. 23696/10 :2 : the benefit of Exts.P7 to P9 judgments and Ext.P10 Government Order. The 4th respondent is also directed to consider the claim made by the 4th petitioner. Orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp