IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 14240 of 2006(T) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ JOSEPH VADAKKETHALA DAVID, RETIRED LECTURER, (SHCOOL OF LEGAL STUDIES, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI 22.)VADAKKETHALA HOUSE, CHOONDY, ALUVA 5. BY ADV. SRI.P.SOMACHUDAN NAIR SMT.V.SUMITA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THER REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TEACHNOLOGY, COCHIN 682 022. *ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED: R2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HIGHER EDUCATION) TO GOVT. OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. (*ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 23/08/06 IN I.A.NO.11326/06) ADV.SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR,SC,CUSAT,COCHIN UTY FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.B.REMANI FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.14240/2006 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE FROM THE INDIAN AIR FORCE WITH COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE VERIFICATION OF MILITARY SERVICE AND LETTER DTD. 27/05/1972 FROM AIR FORCE RECORD OFFICE SANCTIONING THE RESERVIST PENSION. EXT.P2: COPY OF ENROLLMENT CERTIFICATE DTD. 08/07/1972 AS ADVOCATE. EXT.P3: COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.19591 OF 1999 (G). EXT.P4: COPY OF LETTER NO.AD D1/8609/75 DTD. 25/08/2000 SENT BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. EXT.P5: COPY OF APPLICATION DTD. 12/09/2005 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 23/11/2005 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF REPLY DTD. 28/12/2005 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF ARMY PENSION REGULATIONS 1961. EXT.P9: COPY OF GOVERNMENT DECISION NO.10 UNDER RULE 8 KSR. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 12/11/1998 ISSUED BY SECRETARY, BAR COUNCIL, KERALA. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE REPLY NO.10172/B2/2000/H.EDN. DTD. 2/06/2000 TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE REPLY NO.AD.D1/8609/75 DTD. 25/08/2000 TO SRI. JOSEPH VADAKKETHALA. EXT.P13: COPY OF PETITION DTD. 9/01/2007 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P14: COPY OF THE REPLY NO.A1-312/2007 DTD. 9/01/2007 SENT BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL TO THE PETITIONER. Kss ..2/- ...2.... WPC.NO.14240/2006 T EXT.P15: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 29/07/1975 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P16: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AD.A2-8609/75 DTD.12/06/1978 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(A): COPY OF THE LETTER NO.72124/PEN.A1/77/FIN. DTD. 24/11/1977 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.14240/2006 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner had joined the Indian Air Force in 1958. It is stated that he continued in reserve service till 7.7.1972. He was entrolled as an Advocate in the Bar Council of Kerala on 8.7.1972, as is evident from Ext.P2. According to him while he was practicing as an Advocate, he was recruited by the first respondent University and was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Law with effect from 3.4.1973. While continuing so, he completed the age of 60 years on 3.8.1999 and superannuated from service on 30.4.2000. 2. In this writ petition, what is claimed by the petitioner is reckoning of half of his reserve service and also the period he practiced as an Advocate, as qualifying for the purpose of reckoning his retirement benefits. WP(c).No.14240/2006 2 University took up the matter with the Government and Government by Ext.R1(a) letter dated 24.11.1977, held that, petitioner being a military pensioner, is not eligible for the benefit claimed. Acting upon the clarification the University issued Ext.P4. The reason stated in Ext.P4 is that the petitioner was in receipt of military pension for the period inclusive for reservist service. It is also stated that the Government have clarified that the certificate issued by the Secretary of Bar Council of Kerala cannot be accepted as a proof of bar service for reckoning the same for pensionery benefits. Petitioner sought a review of Ext.P4 by filing Ext.P5. That was also rejected by Ext.P7. It is in this background this writ petition has been filed. 3. The claim of the petitioner for reckoning his reservist service as qualifying service for pension is raised relying on Government decision No.10 to Rule 8 Part III KSR. In so far as the claim for addition of bar service is concerned, Rule 25 Part III KSR is what is relied on. In the Government WP(c).No.14240/2006 3 decision No.10 under Rule 8 Part-III KSR, it is stated that 'in the case of reservist service, half of reservist service will count for pension provided the lumpsum gratuity received in lieu of reservist pension is refunded to Government." According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 military certificate shows that he had reservist service from 15.9.1969 and was released only from 19.3.1971. 4. A reading of Ext.R1(a) and Ext.P4 shows that these orders have been rendered without reference to the particulars available in Ext.P1 certificate. Necessarily, therefore the University has to re-examine the claim of the petitioner duly adverting to the entries in Ext.P1 and if it is found that the petitioner satisfies the conditions that are prescribed under the Government decision under rule 8, Part III KSR, necessarily his claim has to be accepted. 5. In so far as the claim of the petitioner for reckoning his bar service for the period from 8.7.1972 till 2.4.1973 is concerned, the petitioner is relying on Ext.P10 certificate WP(c).No.14240/2006 4 issued by the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala. Rule 25 provides for addition of the actual period of the bar service rendered by an incumbent at the time of recruitment as qualifying service. Government decision No.1 provides for the production of a certificate issued by the Presiding Officer of the court,l where the incumbent was practicing before entering Government service, for acceptance as sufficient proof of bar service. In this case, the certificate Ext.P2 is one issued by the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala and that does not satisfy the requirement of Government decision No.1 for the benefit of Rule 25 part III KSR. If that be so, refusal of the University in Ext.P4 to act upon Ext.P10 cannot be said to be faulted. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there have been instances where certificate in the nature of Ext.P10 have been accepted and benefits granted on that basis. As the Government decision requires production of a certificate from the Presiding Officer of the Court, even if WP(c).No.14240/2006 5 there are instances of the University accepting certificate from the other authorities, that cannot be accepted as a precedent. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the University shall reconsider the case of the petitioner for addition of reservist service as provided in Rule 8 of part III KSR. A decision shall be take as expeditiously as possible and at nay rate within two months from th date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.14240/2006 6