IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2010 / 14TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20298 of 2008(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.VIJAYA LAKSHMI, (U.D CLERK, DIRECTORATE OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RTD ON 31/12/2004) MEGHALAYA, KARAKKAMADAPAM, NEMAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P. NANDAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20298/2008-N: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPIES OF PAGE NUMBERS 1ST AND 3RD OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 17/10/2005 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER DTD. 16/05/1996. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 28/11/2005 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.20298 OF 2008(N) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner joined as a part time labourer in the Panchayat Department with effect from 17.3.1978. According to the petitioner, subsequently she was promoted as Full Time Bill Collector with effect from 14.11.1984. While continuing in the Panchayat Department as above, petitioner applied in response to the notification issued by the PSC for appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk in the Collegiate Education Department. She was selected and was advised for appointment. Accordingly she was relieved from the Panchayat Service and joined the Collegiate Education Department as LDC with effect from 9.5.1986. She was promoted as UDC and retired from the service on 31.12.2004 on attaining the age of superannuation. 2. Ext.P1 is the Pension Payment Order which shows that her qualifying service is only for the period from 9.5.1986, when she joined Collegiate Education Department. There upon claiming that the previous service rendered in the Panchayat Department should also be reckoned as qualifying service, petitioner filed WPC.No. 20298/08 :2 : representations. Representations were considered and by Ext.P2 order, first respondent ordered that the service for the period from 14.11.1984 when the petitioner became the full time Bill Collector will be counted and that the previous service as a Part Time Contingent Employee cannot be counted. 3. Relying on Ext.P3 Government order providing that 50% of the contingent service rendered by an employee should be treated as qualifying service in terms of Rule 14-A of Part III KSR, petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation. There was no response to that . Therefore the writ petition is filed. 4. According to the petitioner, Rule 14-A of Part III KSR provides that in the case of contingent employees absorbed in the regular establishment, 50% of their contingent employment will be counted for the purpose of pension. Therefore she says that since she was absorbed in the Panchayat service, 50% of her part time contingent service for the period from 17.3.1978 to 14.11.1984 should be treated as qualifying service for the purpose pension. 5. Learned Government Pleader however submits that although the petitioner commenced her service in the Panchayat WPC.No. 20298/08 :3 : Department, she was appointed as a fresh employee in the Collegiate Education Department from where she retired. It is stated that even if the benefit of Rule 14-A part III KSR is to be given, such benefit is available only to those absorbed and retired from the same department. Learned Government Pleader also relied on the judgment of this court in Abdul Khader V. Accounts Officer(2006(4) KLT 515), in support of this contention. 6. Rule 14-A provides for counting of 50% of part time contingent service in respect of the employees who were absorbed in the regular service. The rule does not say that the benefit of the Rule 14-A will enure to the benefit of the employee, even if he ceased to be an employee in the department in which he is absorbed. Therefore the scope of the rule will have to be confined to the employees who were absorbed and retired from the same department. In this case, admittedly the petitioner was absorbed in the Panchayat service. Thereafter she was appointed in the Collegiate Education Department and from that department, petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2004, on attaining he age of superannuation. Therefore her retirement is WPC.No. 20298/08 :4 : not from the department in which he was absorbed and if so the benefit of Rule 14-A cannot be claimed by the petitioner. It is seen that this view was found acceptance of this court in the judgment relied on by the learned Government Pleader. In that view of the matter the view taken in Ext.P2 that the part time contingent service rendered by the petitioner from 17.3.1978 to 14.11.1984 cannot be counted does not call for interference. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/