IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2010 / 6TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 21702 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.PANKAJAKSHAN, AGED 60 YEARS, MAVUNKAL VEEDU, PUNNAPRA P.O., ALLAPUZHA - 4, (RETIRED DRIVER, KSRTC., ALAPPUZHA) BY ADV. SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI SRI.V.GOPIKRISHNA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESNTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C., ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C., BUS STATION, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY S.C. SHRI V.V. NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 21702 of 2010-K - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the Corporation to revise the monthly pension, DCRG and Commuted Value of Pension by reckoning the provisional daily wage service along with the regular service in the Corporation. 2. The service particulars of the petitioner shows that he retired from service on 31.1.2005 and accordingly the pension and other benefits were sanctioned to him as per Ext.P1. The petitioner was having an earlier appointment as Reserve Driver on daily wages from 21.11.1981 till 26.8.1983 continuously. He is relying upon Clause XXIII of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 13.4.1999 in support of the plea raised in the writ petition. Reliance is also placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Idicula Abraham v. KSRTC and others (2005 (2) KLJ 602). 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that the issue is covered against the petitioner in the light of the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in D.T.O. v. Kunchan ( 2009 (3) KLT 954), wherein wpc 21702/2010 2 the decision of the Division Bench in Idicula's case (supra) has been overruled. It was held by the Full Bench that “any kind of daily rated service followed by regular appointment, would not make him eligible to treat such prior service as regular service.” In the above view of the matter, as the legal issue is covered against the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/