IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.DENESAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2007 / 3RD MAGHA 1928 WP(C).No. 2558 of 2007(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ S.K.MAKKAR, RETIRED LINEMAN GRADE - I, K.S.E.B., GENERATION CIRCLE, MEENCUT, CHITHIRAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SMT.C.V.RAJALAKSHMI SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, (K.S.E.B. IN SHORT), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SHRI.K.S.ANIL, SC FOR K.S.E. BOARD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.K.DENESAN, J. ========================= WP(C).No.2558 OF 2007-D. ========================= Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2007. J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from service on 30-9-2001 on superannuation. His terminal benefits including pension have been calculated taking into account a period of 17 years as qualifying service. The grievance of the petitioner is that the period from 12-2-1979 to 16-10-1994, during which period he had worked as C.L.R. Employee, has not been reckoned as qualifying service. He has filed Ext.P5 representation before the 2nd respondent seeking to rectify the above mistake and to grant him consequential benefits. In short, this is the grievance of the petitioner. 2. Heard Legal Liaison Officer for the respondent Board. He submits that appropriate decision will be taken on Ext.P5 in the light of the relevant orders and the statutory rules. 3. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be an order directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P5 in accordance with law, take appropriate decision within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment WP(C).No.2558/2007. 2 and communicate the same to the petitioner immediately. If the 2nd respondent finds that the request made by the petitioner is allowable, the amount due to the petitioner based on such finding shall be worked out and paid to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is disposed of as above. K.K.DENESAN, JUDGE. kvs/-