IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 OP.No. 8980 of 2000(R) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.S. MANJARI, W/O. LATE K.K. MONY, KANNANPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAITHARAM, CHERIYAPPILLI, N. PARAVUR-683 519. BY ADV. SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN SRI.C.A.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ACCOUONTANT GENERAL, KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 8980/2000. --------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION. EXT.P2 DO. DT. 23.11.1999. EXT.P3 DO. DT. 15-1-2000. EXT.P4 DO. DT. 18-1-2000. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 8980 of 2000 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 20th January, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the widow of late K.K. Mani who retired from service of the Government of Kerala as a Headmaster on 31-5-1997. The petitioner has, in this original petition, raised certain claims in respect of the retirement benefits due to her late husband. The first is that aided school service of her husband prior to entering Government service for the period from 9-6-1964 to 5-6-1972 was not reckoned for the purpose of calculating pension, which, according to the petitioner, is reckonable for the purpose. The second is that pay revision benefits due to the petitioner's husband, which came into effect with effect from March, 1997, have not been paid to the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. Rule 14E of Part III of Kerala Service Rules specifically stipulates that aided school service put in by Government employees prior to entry in Government service qualifies as qualifying service for the purpose of pension. That being so, the retirement benefits of the petitioner's husband is liable to be re-computed, taking into account his aided school service for the period from 9-6-1964 to 5-6-1972. There would be a direction to re-compute the retirement benefits to the petitioner's husband accordingly. 4. Petitioner retired in May, 1997. Although, pay revision order was issued subsequently, it was given retrospective effect with effect from March, 1997, ie, prior to the retirement of the petitioner's husband. Therefore, petitioner's husband is entitled to get the benefits of that pay revision. Accordingly, there would be a direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner the arrears due to the petitioner's husband, on account of the 1997 pay revision. Orders with regard to the above two claims of the petitioner O.P. No. 8980/2000. -: 2 :- shall be passed and arrears disbursed to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The original petition is allowed as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/