IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 OP.No. 20274 of 2000(L) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K. KAMALA, ASSISTANT TEACHER (RTD), RESIDING AT PRASANTH, ANNOTH, KARVELLUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. K.V. KUNHIKORAN, ASST. TEACHER (RETD). RESIDING AT VELLACHAL, P.O. KODAKKAD, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. T.P. KANDANKORAN, PEON (RETD, A.V.S. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, P.O. MANIYAT, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR SRI. M.R. SABU FOR R1 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 20274 of 2000 ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.33974 OF 2000 IN O.P.NO.20274 OF 2000 CLOSED 6.11.2008 SD/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. APPENDIX EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.5.99 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN, PAY REVISION ANOMALY COMMITTEE. EXT.P2; COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.5.99 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN, PAY REVISION ANOMALY COMMITTEE. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.5.99 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN PAY REVISION ANOMALY COMMITTEE. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.78518/PRI-1/99/ FIN DATED 18.11.1999 TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P5; COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.85700/PR-I/99/ FIN DATED 18.11.1999 TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER NO,C4-26237/99 DTD 15.1.2000 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR EDUCATION, KANNUR. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ O.P.No. 20274 OF 2000 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are retired Government servants. They retired prior to pay revision effected with effect from 1.3.1997. Their grievance in this original petition is that their retirement benefits have not been computed taking into account the interim relief granted also, which was a prelude to the revision of pay with effect from 1.3.1997. According to them, since as per the pay revision with effect from 1.3.1997, the interim relief was also taken into account for the purpose of fixation of the scales of pay that benefit should have been given to the petitioners also for the purpose of fixation of their retirement benefits. The petitioners’ representations in this regard were directed to be considered as per judgment in O.P.No.18542/99 pursuant to which Exts.P4 and P5 orders have been passed by the Government rejecting the claims of the petitioners. That is under challenge before me. 2. As I have already stated, the grievance of the O.P.NO.20274/2000 2 petitioners is that the interim relief given to them has not been reckoned for the purpose of pensionary benefits. However, it is not disputed before me that as per G.O.(P) No.514/96(101)/ Fin. Dated 30.7.1996, the Government had clarified that the interim relief will not be treated as Pay/Allowance and hence it will not be reckoned for the purpose of calculating average emoluments for pension. The petitioners have not challenged that Government Order. That being so, going by that Government Order, they are not entitled to reckon the interim relief for the purpose of calculation of pensionary benefits. The fact that the interim relief was also taken into account for the purpose of fixation of the scale of pay with effect from 1.3.1997, even if correct would not enure to the benefit of the petitioners in so far as they had retired from service prior to 1.3.1997 from which date only the pay revision came into force. In the above circumstance, I do not find any merit in the contentions of the petitioners. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd O.P.NO.20274/2000 3