IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 14542 of 2008(F) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. P.M.VIJAYA RAGHAVAN, JUNIOR EXECUTIVE, REGIONAL OFFICER, KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD,KOZHIKODE. 2. O.B.THANKAMANI, PEON, REGIONAL OFFICE, KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.DEEPU THANKAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD, AYYAPPA NAGER, POONKUNNAM,THRISSUR-2, REPRESENTED BY ITS FISHERIES WELFARE COMMISSIONER. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FISHERIES AND PORTS (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETRIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHARIYAN, SC, KFWFB R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSE ADIYODI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.14542/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE STAFF REGULATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BOARD. P2 COPY OF THE LIST OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS WITH THE AGE OF RETIREMENT PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU ENTERPRISES IN THE YEAR 2002- 2003. P3 COPY OF THE LIST OF THE WELFARE FUND BOARD UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH RETIREMENT AGE P4 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING HELD ON 26/10/2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING HELD ON 23/11/2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P6 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/11/2007 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P7 COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11/12/2007. P8 COPY OF THE GOVT.ORDER DATED 28/3/2003. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 14542 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th November, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioners are employees of the Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund Board (the Board for short). The petitioners filed this writ petition complaining that though the Board had decided to enhance the retirement age of its employees from 55 years to 58 years enabling the employees to get pension from the Employees Provident Fund the Government did not approve the same as per Ext.P7. As per an interim order granted by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.1054/2008 on 27-5-2008 the petitioners were permitted to continue in service till they attained the age of 58 years. However, it has been stipulated in the said order that the salary and other benefits of the petitioners need not be paid till the disposal of the writ appeal. 2. Accordingly the petitioners continued in service and retired on attaining the age of 58 years. The present grievance of the petitioners is that though they had worked up to the age of 58 years, they have not been paid any salary for the period subsequent to the date on which they attained 55 years of age. The petitioners WPC 14542/2008 2 seek issue of appropriate directions for the disbursement of the salary and other benefits due to them on the basis of their service. 3. It is pointed out by the counsel for the petitioners that as per Ext.P12 the Government has enhanced the retirement age of the employees from 55 to 58 years. Having declared the policy of the Government and having enhanced the age of similarly placed employees of the Board to 58 years, it is pointed out that there is no justification for denying to the petitioners their salary and other benefits for the period during which they have actually worked. Therefore, they seek appropriate directions in this regard. 4. Adv. Asok M.Cherian appears for the Board and points out that Ext.P12 does not have any retrospective operation. Though the retirement age of the present employees have been enhanced to 58, the petitioners having retired prior to the date of Ext.P12 are not entitled to the benefit thereof. The learned Govt. Pleader also supports the contention of the counsel for the Board. 5. It is not disputed that the petitioners had continued in service, without being retired at the age of 55, up to the age of 58 years. Their continuance was on the basis of the interim order in the writ appeal, referred to above. Therefore, during the period of three years from the time the petitioners completed 55 years to the WPC 14542/2008 3 age of 58 years they had continued to work without being paid any salary or other benefits. The Board has taken the benefit of their labour without compensating them for such benefit. Since the petitioners are only seeking wages for the period they have actually worked, I am of opinion that they are entitled to succeed. The above is irrespective of whether Ext.P12 is prospective or retrospective in operation. 6. The petitioners are therefore entitled to be paid the salary and other benefits due to them on the same terms as the other employees of the Board for the period that they have worked, from the date on which they completed 55 years till they superannuated on completion of 58 years of age. 7. This writ petition is accordingly allowed as follows: a) The petitioners shall be paid the salary and all other service benefits due to them for the period that they have worked, from the date on which they attained 55 years to the date on which they have superannuated on completing 58 years of age. b) The amounts due to the petitioners shall be computed and disbursed to them as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. WPC 14542/2008 4 c) The petitioners shall be at liberty to move the appropriate authorities for any claim of interest that they may have for the delay in payment of the amounts due to them. Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj P.S.to Judge