IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2008 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 8621 of 2004(B) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------------- 1. R.KANAKARAJAN, S/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 55 YEARS, COACH BUILDER GRADE-II (RETD.), KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND RESIDING AT "LAKSHMI BHAVAN", NEDUVATHUVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.KRISHNANKUTTY ASARI, S/O. LATE K.KUTTAN ASARI, AGED 53 YEARS, WORKING AS COACH BUILDER GRADE-II, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL WORKS, PAPPANAMCODE AND RESIDING AT PERATHALA HOUSE, AUNICODE,KOLLAMCODE P.O.,KANYAKUMARI DT.,TAMILNADU 3. S.AYYAPPAN ACHARI, S/O. LATE SUBRAMANIYA ACHARI, AGED 53,WORKING AS COACH BUILDER GRADE-II,KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND RESIDING AT "SATHEESH NIVAS T.C.NO.22/770,MANKKADY P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-9. 4. K.GOPALAKRISHNAN ASARI, S/O.LATE KRISHNAN ASARI,AGED 54,WORKING AS COACH BUILDER GRADE-II,KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PRESENTLY WORKING AS VELLANADU DEPOT AND RESIDING AT "VASANTHALAYAM", PAPPANAM, AMBALATHUMKALA P.O., KATTAKKADA. BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.K. ORABHAKARAN, SC. KSRTC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC. 8621/2004. APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXTS: EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF ADVICE LIST NO.RIB(2)41135/85/GW DATED 18.12.'87 FOR APPOINTMENT AS COAH BUILDER GRADE-II ON RS.335-670/- IN THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORIATION. EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.E8-11019/96/CW DATED 2/4/1997 ISSUED BY THE MECHANICAL ENGINEER (W), CENTRAL WORKS, PAPPANAMCODE. EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.E8-11019/96/CW DATED 19.6.1997 ISSUED BY THE MECHANICAL ENGINEER (W), CENTRAL WORKS, PAPPANAMCODE. EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.E8-11019/96/CW DATED 19.3.1997 ISSUED BY THE MECHANICAL ENGINEER (W), CENTRAL WORKS, PAPPANAMCODE. EXT. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.10.2002 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION WITHOUT ANNEXURES. EXT. P6 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21.1.2003 IN O.P. 2239/2003-N PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT. P7 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.PLD1-048672/2002 DATED 10.11.2003 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION TO THE FOURTH PETITIONER. EXT. P8 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.G.O.(P) NO.1851/99/FIN. DATED 18.9.1999 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE), FINANCE (PAY REVISION IMPLEMENTATION) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.8621 of 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners have approached this court challenging Ext.P7 and seeking a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to count the period from the date of their advise for the post of Coach Builder, that is, from 18.12.1987 for pension purpose and seniority. A declaration is also sought that the pre-appointment training period has to be counted for grade promotion. The further prayer is for a direction to the respondents to count the pre-appointment training period for grade promotion and to issue orders thereon. 2. The case of the petitioners in brief is as follows: Petitioners retired from service on superannuation on 31.3.2003. They were working as Coach Builders. They were selected by the Public Service Commission in the year 1987. They were actually appointed much later in 1996. Their first complaint is that they are entitled to pension from the date of advise, however, pension is being reckoned only from the date of appointment. They have approached this court earlier and this court had directed Ext.P5 to be considered. It is pursuant to that, Ext.P7 order has been passed. In Ext.P7 it is reiterated that appointment is only in WPC.8621/2004. 2 the year 1996 though the advise is much earlier and pension is payable only in accordance with the Rules. 3. Regarding the question as to counting the service from the date of advise for the purpose of grant of pension, the question is concluded against the petitioners by virtue of the decision of this court in W.A.536 of 2007. Therein a Division Bench of this court, taking note of Rule 10 of the Kerala Service Rules Part III Chapter II, took the view that the qualifying service for the purpose of pension can be calculated only from the date of appointment. In the light of this, Ext.P7, taking the view that petitioners cannot be granted pension from the date of advise, is only to be upheld and therefore Ext.P7 is upheld. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners Sri. N. Unnikrishnan points out that this court had directed Ext.P5 to be considered. In Ext.P5 there was a prayer to take into consideration the pre-appointment training period for grade promotion. It is the complaint of the petitioners that the same has not been considered. There is no serious contention that the said contention was considered. Accordingly, I feel that the first respondent should take a decision on Ext.P5 representation in so far as it relates to the claim for grade promotion by taking into account the pre-appointment training. WPC.8621/2004. 3 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners then raised a contention that the petitioners are entitled to ex-gratia pension. There is no such prayer. However, I leave open that question and it is for the petitioners to move the authority for claiming ex-gratia pension if the petitioners are entitled to the same. While upholding Ext.P7 in relation to the request for counting the period from the date of advise, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and take a decision on the question whether the petitioners are entitled to count the pre-appointment training period for the purpose of grade promotion. A decision in accordance with law will be taken by the first respondent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb