IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 16514 of 2007(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. T.P.NANU, CHIRAG HOUSE, MEENPERIYAR ROAD, PAYYOLI, PIN-673522, RETIRED SECRETARY OF PAYYOLI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOZHIKODE. 2. P.C.AUGUSTY, S/O.CHACKO, PADALODIL, KALLANODU P.O.,KOZHIKODE, SECRETARY, KALLANODU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.F 1827, KALLANODU, KOZHIKODE. 3. T.SREEDHARAN, S/O.SANKARAN, SREEKALA, BALUSSERY, PIN-673612, SECRETARY, PANANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.3928, P.B.NO.5, BALUSSERY. 4. M.K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, PADMASREE, CHELYA P.O., KOYILANDY, CALICUT, SECRETARY, MELUR SCB LTD.,CHELYA, KOYILANDY. 5. P.KRISHNAN, VAISHNAVAM, MOODADI P.O., KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE, SECRETARY, MOODADI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KATALOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE. 6. M.J.THRESIAMMA, W/O.GEORGE, KURISUMOOTTIL HOUSE, P.O.CHAKKITTAPPARA, KOZHIKODE, SECRETARY, CHAKKITTAPARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.F 1675, P.O.CHAKKITTAPPARA. 7. K.BALAKRISHNAN, SECRETARY, TIKKOTI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. SRI.P.P.JACOB SRI.B.MANIMOHAN ...2/- WP(C).No. 16514 of 2007(N) -2- RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES' PENSION BOARD, P.B.NO.85, KALA NIVAS, T.C.NO.27/156,157, CHINMAYA LANE, KUNNUMPURAM, NEAR AYURVEDA COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.MOHANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2011, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO. 29212/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...3/- WP(C).No. 16514 of 2007(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O.P. 129/06/CO-OP DATED 12.7.2006. EXT.P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4806/07 DATED 23.2.2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(A) : COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO. 129/06 CO -OP 12-7-06. EXT.R2(a) : COPY OF THE GO (P) NO. 239/2008/CO-OP DATED 22-10-2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)Nos. 16514 & 29212 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T In these two writ petitions the petitioners are retired employees of the Co-operative Societies. They are aggrieved by calculation of their pension under the Co- operative Societies Pension Scheme. With effect from 07.08.2006 a 2nd proviso was added to paragraph 22 of the Scheme. The question relates to the applicability of that scheme to the case of the petitioners. It is not now disputed before me that the issue involved in these two writ petitions are squarely covered by Ext.P2 judgment in W.P. (C) No.16514/2007 which reads as follows: “The petitioners are challenging sub clause (d) of paragraph 2 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Employees Self Financing Pension (Amendment) Scheme, 2006 as unconstitutional, void and unenforceable. Paragraph 2 (d) of the Amendment Scheme limits the average pay for calculating pension payable to an employee whose service is less than 30 years at Rs.20,000/-. According to the petitioners, they are having more than 32 years of service. So since the petitioners have put in more than 30 years of service, the provisions contained in paragraph 2 (d) of the Amendment Scheme will not apply to them. They are entitled to get pension under the old Scheme. So, there is no need to consider the vires of the said Scheme in his case.” W.P.(C)Nos. 16514 & 29212 of 2007 -2- While admitting that the facts of that case are identical to the facts of this case, the learned Standing Counsel for the Pension Board argues for reconsideration of that judgment. But it is admitted before me that the Pension Board had not chosen to challenge Ext.P2 judgment in appeal. In Ext.P2 judgment also the Pension Board was a party. Having not chosen to challenge the same in appeal, I do not think that the Pension Board can now seek reconsideration of that judgment. Even otherwise I am in agreement with that decision. In the above circumstances, these two writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the judgment in W.P. (C) No.4806/2007 which is produced as Ext.P2 in W.P. (C) No.16514/2007 which is reproduced above. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/