IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33037 of 2010(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. S. KRISHNAN CHETTIAR, ARAMANA, KILIKOLLOOR P.O., KOLLAM-4. 2. LOUIS J., JOSE VILLA, KAIKULANGARA NORTH, THIRUMULLAVAROM P.O., KOLLAM-12. 3. N. MADHAVAN PILLAI, KOTTAYIL AZHIKATHU VEEDU, ERATHU NORTH, CHELIKKUZHY P.O., PATTAZHI, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. N. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, SREE BHAVAN, MUTHUPILAKKAD P.O., VIA PORUVAZHI, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. R. RAVEENDRAN, SREEKRISHNA BHAVAN, MARUTHADI P.O., KOLLAM-3. 6. G. SREEDHARAN PILLAI, GEETHA BHAVAN, PULIPPARA P.O., KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7. N. GOPINATHAN PILLAI, KOYIKKAVILAKOM, THUDAYANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 8. S. SREEDHARAN, KOORAYIL VEEDU, VAKKOM P.O., CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. GOPIDAS, SATHI VILASOM, MAYYANAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 10. V. GANGADHARAN, PUTHENVILA VEEDU, ARUVAKKONAM, EZHUCON, KOLLAM DISTRICT. WP(C).No. 33037 of 2010(D) 11. N. GOPINATHAN NAIR, CKRA 168-B, KARYAM, SREEKARIYAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-17. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN, SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD, SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM), SRI.MATHEW SUNNY, SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION (B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. THE REGISTRAR, REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.33037 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 1st November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners are retired employees of Co-operative Societies. All of them were retired from service prior to 3.6.1993. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P2 petitioners 1 and 2 have preferred Ext.P8 representation. In fact, the said representation has been submitted to rectify the anomaly in the pension payment scheme. According to the petitioners, on account of Ext.P2 without any rhyme or reason, a classification was effected whereby similarly situated persons have been discriminated on the basis of the date of retirement. The petitioners have specifically raised all such contentions and grievances in Ext.P8 representation. I am of the view that those are matters to be considered by the first respondent at the first instance. Admittedly, Ext.P8 representation is pending before the second respondent. 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that the authority competent to look into the anomaly is the first respondent and though the petitioners have, earlier, submitted Ext.P3 representation before the first respondent, a perusal of Ext.P3 would reveal that it is addressed to the Minister for Co-operation. Taking into account the said WP(C).No.33037/2010 2 circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of as hereunder:- The second respondent shall forward Ext.P8 representation before the authority competent i.e., the first respondent to consider the grievances raised by the petitioners against Ext.P2 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of such representation from the second respondent the first respondent shall consider Ext.P8 representation expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months thereafter. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS