IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2011 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 19113 of 2011(L) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- A.M.KURIACHAN, S/O.LATE MATHEW, AREEKKAL HOUSE, AKAPARAMBU, MEKKAD P.O., PIN - 683589 (RETIRED AS ASSISTANT ENGINEER FROM THE KSEB ON 1/8/2003 FN). BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 4. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, HRMS, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 4. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC., K.S.E.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 22926 OF 2011 WPC NO. 28144 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 19113/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/11/2008. P2: COPY OF THE REVISED PENSION ORDER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 03/09/2003. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).Nos.19113, 22926 & 28144 of 2011. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th December, 2011. COMMON JUDGMENT Since the issues that arise for consideration in these three writ petitions are identical, they are all disposed of together by this common judgment. 2. The petitioners in all these three cases are retired employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board ('KSEB' for short). They had retired during the years 2005 and 2006. As per Exts.P1 to P4 orders they were sanctioned their retirement benefits. Subsequently, the pay and allowances of officers in the KSEB were revised with effect from 1.7.2003 as per Ext.P5 order. As per Ext.P5, the rate of commutation of pension was also enhanced to 40% of the pension based on the revised pay. Though the pension of the petitioners were revised in accordance with Ext.P5, the commutation of pension was not so revised. Therefore, they WP(C).Nos.19113, 22926 & 28144/2011. 2 have filed these writ petitions seeking revision of their commutation of pension also. 3. As per Ext.P10 judgment, in a writ petition filed by the other similarly placed employees, this Court has held that the petitioners therein were entitled to the commutation of pension also at the revised rate. However, as per judgment dated 11.11.2011 in WA.No.40/2011 this Court has set aside Ext.P10 judgment holding that the petitioners are not entitled to revision of their commutation of pension. Consequently, the petitioners are not entitled to the reliefs claimed in these writ petitions. In view of the above, these writ petitions are dismissed. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-