IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 5505 of 2011(K) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. K.S.R.T.C PENSIONERS & EMPLOYEES WELFARE FORUM REG. NO.T 1645/10, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, L.G REECHES FERNADEZ,K.S.R.T.C PENSIONERS & EMPLOYEES WELFARE FORUM OFFICE, IST FLOOR,PADIPPURA,CHARUVILA LANE, KESAVADASAPURAM,PATTOM.P.O,TRIVANDRUM - 695 004. 2. N. PURUSHOTHAMAN, PRAYATHNA, CHEMMANNUVILA, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR.P.O, NEYYATINKARA, (CHARGEMAN, KSRTC, CENTRAL WORKS, PAPPANAMCODE - RETIRED ON 31/05/2007). 3. G. SREEKUMARAN NAIR, SREEPADAM, TC 6/1251, KANJIRAMPARA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -20, (SPL. ASSISTANT, KSRTC, PAPPANAMCODE DEPOT, RETIRED ON 31/07/1999). BY ADV. SRI.ANANDARAJAN.N RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-23. BY V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC., K.S.R.T.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 5955 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 5505/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1(a):COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF 1ST PETITIONER. P1(b):COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF 2ND PETITIONER. P1(c):COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF 3RD PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 27/06/2008 IN WPC. NO.29909/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES. P3: COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 05/09/2008 IN W.A. NO.1845/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES. P4: COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30/09/2008 IN W.A. NO.1981/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES. P5: COPY OF ORDER DATED 18/11/2008 PASSING ITERIM STAY BY THE APEX COURT IN SLP NO.27713/2008. P6: COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 10/09/2010 OF THE APEX COURT IN SLP. NO.27713/2008. P7: COPY OF ORDER NO.PL B6-030791/99 DATED 07/10/99. P8: COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.PLB(R)1- 040151/2000 DTD.16/10/2000 P9: COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.EDP-009693/2010 DATED 06/10/2010. P10: COPY OF LETTER NO.BUD 1/1106/08 DATED 04/08/2008 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). Nos. 5505 & 5955 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The first petitioner in the former Writ Petition is K.S.R.T.C Pensioner's & Employees Welfare Forum with Reg.No.T.1645/10. It is being represented by its General Secretary who is a retiree from the service of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation'). He retired from its service on 28.2.2002. The second petitioner is the Vice President of the said Association. He retired from the service of the Corporation on 31.5.2007. The third petitioner is also member of the first petitioner forum and he retired from the service of the Corporation on 31.7.1999. It is not stated anything in the Writ Petition about the statute under which the first petitioner forum was registered. The latter Writ Petition has been filed by the K.S.R.T.C Pensioners Association which is registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 with registration No.400/80. It is being represented by its General Secretary who retired from the Corporation as Superintendent. The second petitioner retired from the service of the Corporation on 28.2.1999 while working as an W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 2 Inspector. The main reliefs sought for in the former Writ Petition are as follows:- ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to disburse the pay revision arrears merged to the provident fund accounts to all pensioners retired from 1.3.1997 onwards including statutory rate of interest till date of actual payment for the period from 1.3.1997 to 31.10.1999 as per Clause XXVIII of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 13.4.1999 and in compliance of Ext.P2 and P4 judgments of the Division Benches and Ext.P6 order of the Apex Court strictly in accordance with their retirement seniority. ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to revise the pension of the pensioners retired between 1.3.1997 and 30.11.2000 with effect from the date of their retirement and pay the arrears for the period from the date of retirement till 30.11.2000 immediately; The reliefs sought for in the latter Writ Petition are as follows: (i) Issue w writ of mandamus or writ or similar nature or order or direction commanding the respondent to sanction and disburse the arrears of pay and pension based on the bipartite settlement dtd. 13.4.1999 to all the eligible retired persons of the respondent Corporation who retired after 1.3.1997 immediately; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature or direction commanding the respondent to W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 3 pay interest at 9% over arrears of pay and pension to all the retired persons from their date of retirement immediately; 2. A bare perusal of the prayers in the above Writ Petitions would reveal that the petitioners are not solely seeking for disbursement of their individual arrears of pay and pension in terms of the aforementioned bipartite settlement whilst seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Corporation to sanction and disburse arrears of pay and pension to all its retirees between 1.3.1997 to 31.10.1999, with interest. Admittedly, the first petitioner forum/organisation in these Writ Petitions are not parties to the bipartite settlement and, in fact, the employees were represented by the recognised Trade Unions namely, the Kerala State Road Transport Employees Association and the Transport Worker's Co-ordination Council. That apart, the details regarding their members and their service particulars are not available in the pleadings. Being members of the first petitioner forum or organisation cannot by itself fetch them the eligibility to such benefits and they cannot contend that all the retirees are entitled to get the same amount as arrears of pay and pension. In other words, it depends upon certain relevant factors. There may be persons who attained the age of superannuation while facing W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 4 disciplinary proceedings and in some cases, such proceedings might have culminated in punishments and in some cases, might have been converted to a proceedings for reducing pension. In short, without taking into account those and such other relevant aspects, the authorities competent may not be in a position to sanction and disburse arrears of pay and pension in terms of the above mentioned bipartite settlement. If there is inordinate delay in the matter of its disbursement at the instance of the concerned retiree, such facts can also be properly looked into. However, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to sanction and disburse arrears of pay and pension to all those who retired from the service of the Corporation between 1.3.1997 to 31.10.1999, as general nature, cannot be appreciated at all. Even without a declaration or direction touching the said issue in the light of the common judgment in W.P.(C).No.29276 of 2006 and connected matters (Ext.P2 in W.P.(C). No.5505 of 2011), and the common judgment in W.A.No.1845 of 2008 and connected matters (Ext.P3 in W.P.(C).No.5505 of 2011), order in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.27713 of 2008 of the Apex Court and the provisions under the Kerala Service Rules and the bipartite settlement dated 13.4.1999, the respondents are liable to pay the benefits flowing W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 5 from the said settlement to the eligible retirees. In fact, the respondent did not dispute its liability to pay the arrears of pay and pension to the eligible retirees. However, that cannot be a reason for upholding the claim of the petitioners for a direction of a general nature as mentioned above. The amount of arrears of pay and revision payable may not be the same for all the retirees. There cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that in respect of each and every retiree from the service of the Corporation, his/her pension papers have to be processed separately. It is only after such processing, after verifying the relevant service particulars of the concerned retiree that the amount to which a particular retiree is entitled could be ascertained. That endeavour has to be made by the competent authority under the Corporation taking into account individual cases. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to issue any general direction to sanction and disburse the benefits to all the retirees from the period 1.3.1997 to 30.10.1999 for the purpose of quantifying the pay revision arrears and to revise the pension of the retirees from 1.3.1997 to 30.11.2000 at the instance of the petitioner organisation/forum. The entitlement to interest, if any, on account of non-disbursement of the aforesaid benefits also has to be decided taking into account various W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 6 aspects. For the foregoing reasons, at the instance of the petitioners, a general direction to sanction and disbursement of such benefits flowing from the bipartite settlement with a particular rate of interest cannot be given. At the same time, it is made clear that in case any of the individual petitioners is entitled to the benefits of pay revision or arrears of pension by virtue of the bipartite settlement dated 13.4.1999 or 28.11.2008 in the light of Exts.P3, P4, and P6 and also subsequent judgments in W.P.(C). No.34325/2010 and connected matters, the respondents shall compute such benefits payable to them in terms of the provisions thereunder and the same shall be disbursed to such petitioners in terms of the directions in W.P.(C).No.34325/2010 and connected matters. Subject to the above observations, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 7 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) 5505 & 5955/2011 8