IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 33965 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. PARAMESWARAN,KR/112/1919, LT:DN,LONE TREE ESTATE,LONE TREE POST, VIA. UPPUTHARA-685 505. 2. VARGHESE,KR/112/1933, PPO-KR/KTM/9966,LT:DN,LONE TREE ESTATE, LONE TREE POST,VIA UPPUTHARA-685 505. BY ADV. MR.VIJAI MATHEWS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (PENSION), EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,CHALAKUZHY BUILDING, KOTTAYAM. 2. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, PROVIDENT FUND OFFICE,ERNAKULAM. 3. THE PEERMADE TEA COMPANY LTD., REPRESENTED BY S.K.STEPHEN,SECTION OFFICER, LONE TREE ESTATE,NOW AT KAVAKKULAM ESTATE OFFICE, FAIR FIELD P.O.,ELAPPARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 501. R1 & R2 BY JOY THATTIL ITOOP, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.33965/2009-M: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER AND PENSION PARTICULARS OF P.1. DTD. NIL. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER AND PENSION PARTICULARS OF SECOND PETITIONER DTD. NIL. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE BREAK IN SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF THE P.1. DTD. NIL. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE BREAK IN SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF THE P.2. DTD. NIL. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 09/12/2008. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 16/12/2008. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE VERSION DTD. NIL. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 07/04/2009. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 07/04/2009. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DTD. 21/11/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.33965 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the action of the first respondent in not including their entire service for calculation of pension. According to the petitioners, there is an error in preparation of the Break-in-Service Certificate by the third respondent. The petitioners are permanent workers in the Lone Tree Estate under the third respondent, Company from 1975 onwards. According to the first petitioner, he has 20 years of past service, but only 13 years have been counted for computing his pension. Though the second petitioner has 19 years of service, only 14 years have been counted for his pension. Though they had submitted representations to verify the Break- in-Service Certificate, and to correct the errors, no action has been taken thereon. The petitioners rely on Ext.P10 judgment by which directions have been issued to recalculate the Break-in-Service in case of other similarly placed persons. Therefore, they claim that their case is also entitled to be considered similarly. Wpc 33965/09 2 2. I have heard Adv.Joy Thattil Itoop, who appears for the Provident Fund Organisation, also. 3. In view of the directions contained in Ext.P10 judgment, there is no reason why the petitioner should be denied a similar opportunity. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the total length of service of the petitioners to calculate the break in service, if any and to recompute the pension that is payable to the petitioners on the said basis. Needful in this regard shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners also. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk