IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 27795 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ P.K.KUNJAMMA, PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, PAKIL POST, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATNHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 27796 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NOs. 27795 & 27796 OF 2009 (T) =========================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner in WP(C) NO.27795/09 joined service on 12/3/1966 in the District Hospital, Palakkad as Staff Nurse. Thereafter, she was transferred and posted to District Hospital, Kottayam. By Ext.P1 order dated 5/4/1976, she was granted leave without allowance for taking up employment abroad for a period of five years. According to the petitioner, after the expiry of the period, she applied for extension for another five years and did not get any reply. Petitioner also has no case that she has done anything after the expiry of the initial period of leave or that she got the leave extended or rejoined service. She does not say what the authorities have done against her and she has not stated when she attained the age of superannuation. She now says that she should be paid pension for the services she has rendered and that Ext.P3 representation made has not evoked any response. 2. In so far as the petitioner in WP(C) No.27796/09 is concerned, according to the petitioner, he was a Health Assistant, WPC 27795 & 27796/09 :2 : who availed of leave without allowances for five years by Ext.P1 order dated 6/7/1977. It is stated that he went to USA and accepted employment there. It is stated that subsequently he applied for extension of the period, but there was no reply. It is stated that by Ext.P2 submitted in 2005, he applied for pension and there has not been any response. 3. On the other hand, standing counsel for the 4th respondent submits that after the expiry of the period of leave granted to the petitioner in WP(C) No.27796/09, it was not extended and that the petitioner also did not report for duty. It is stated that in 2004 January, petitioner made an application for pension and that they had called upon him to produce service papers, which was not complied with. It is stated that in 2005, an order was also passed rejecting the petitioner's request for pension. 4. Evidently, in these cases, the petitioners have entered service and thereafter left for abroad for taking up employment there. On expiry of the leave period, they did not come back nor did they get the leave period extended. It was while so that they have allegedly attained the age of superannuation, the date of WPC 27795 & 27796/09 :3 : which also is not disclosed in these writ petitions. Petitioners have not produced any material to show that they have rendered the qualifying service or that inspite of their having abandoned the service, they are entitled to be paid pension. 5. Although, when this case came up for orders on 2/11/2009, the case was adjourned on the request of the counsel for the petitioners for producing the materials to substantiate that the petitioners are eligible for pension, no materials have also been produced. In these circumstances, on the materials produced, the only course open to this Court is to dismiss these writ petitions. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp