IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2010 / 11TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 31447 of 2003(R) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M.C. PADMANABHAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL) RETIRED, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRANSMISSION CIRCLE, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. FINANCIAL ADVISOR & CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. STANDING COUNSEL MR.C.K.KARUNAKARAN FOR KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 31447 of 2003 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of letter dated 1.12.98 issued by 1st respondent to the petitioner. Ext.P2 :- Copy of Government Order G.O.(P) No.228/2001/Fin. Dated 2.2.2001. Ext.P3 :- Copy of representation dated 19.11.2001 submitted by petitioner before the 1st respondent. Ext.P4 :- Copy of representation dated 8.10.2002 submitted by petitioner before the 1st respondent. Ext.P5 :- Copy of the judgment dated 19.12.2002 in O.P.No.38598/02 of this Hon'ble Court. Ext.P6 :- Copy of the proceedings No.LAS.I/18404/2002 dated 11.7.2003 issued by the first respondent. Ext.P7 :- Copy of the board order dated 10.12.2002. Ext.P8 :- Copy of the order dated 11.5.2010 issued by the board. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL //True Copy// P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No.31447 of 2003 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 2nd day of August 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner joined the Kerala State Electricity Board as an Overseer on 6.9.1973 and retired from service on 28.2.2002 as an Assistant Engineer (Civil). Prior to that he had worked as Work Superintendent in the Municipal Common Service for the period from 27.10.1969 till 5.9.1973. He requested for reckoning his prior service in the Municipal Common Service as qualifying service for pension and that was rejected by Ext.P1 order. Subsequently, Government issued Ext.P2 order dated 2.2.2001 ordering that government employees who are rendered prior service in State Government Departments, State Autonomous Bodies and Public Sector Undertakings will get the benefit of their prior service as qualifying W.P.(C) No.31447 of 2003 -: 2 :- service. According to the Board, by Board Order dated 6.1.2003, Board adopted Ext.P2 order. Petitioner represented for the benefit of Ext.P2. As orders were not been passed, he again submitted Ext.P4 representation. Pursuant to the directions of this Court contained in Ext.P5 judgment, his claim was considered and was rejected by the Board as per Ext.P6 order. In Ext.P6, the Board took the stand that by mere adoption of Ext.P2 Government Order, the benefits contemplated therein cannot be implemented to the employees of Kerala State Electricity Board. It is challenging Ext.P6 that this writ petition is filed. 2. First contention raised is that the Board having adopted Ext.P2 Government Order is liable to give credit to the prior service rendered by the petitioner in the Municipal Common Service. Other contention raised is that in respect of one of the employees of the Board namely; Sri.N.S.Rajendran, Accounts Officer, Electrical Circle, Kannur, benefit of Ext.P2 has already be given by the W.P.(C) No.31447 of 2003 -: 3 :- Board. 3. In the statement filed on behalf of the 1st respondent Board, although it is stated that Ext.P2 Government Order was adopted by the Board as per Board Order dated 6.1.2003, since Ext.P2 Government Order is inapplicable to the employees of the Board, petitioner's claim is inadmissible. 4. Although it is true that Ext.P2 Government Order is inapplicable to the employees of the respondent Board once the Board has adopted Ext.P2, such adoption is for extending the benefit of Ext.P2 to the employees of the Board. Therefore having adopted Ext.P2 order, the Board is liable to extend the benefit of Ext.P2 to the eligible employees of the Board. In that view of the matter the statement in Ext.P6 that even after adoption of the Government Order, benefits cannot be implemented to the employees of the Board is unsustainable. Therefore, I quash Ext.P6 and direct the Board to pass fresh orders in W.P.(C) No.31447 of 2003 -: 4 :- the matter, duly adverting to the above observations in the judgment and in the light of Ext.P2 Government Order adopted by the Board. Orders in that respect shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt