IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 1182 of 2010 ----------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19167/2010 DATED 21.6.2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN W.P(C) --------------------------------------- T.O.CHACKO, AGED 80 YEARS, THOMMANPARAMBIL, NEAR M.S.S.HIGH SCHOOL, THAZHAKKARA.P.O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN W.P(C) ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (HRM), VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTAM PALACE.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, CHENGANNUR. 4. THE ACCOUNT OFFICER, PENSION SANCTION, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, CHENGANNUR. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, MAVELIKARA. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.ASOK M.CHERIYAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.N.Ravindran, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1182 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. The unsuccessful petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19167 of 2010 is the appellant herein. 2. The appellant worked as a Lineman in the first respondent Electricity Board. His services came to be an end in the year 1985 though there is some dispute as to how such an end was brought about. The learned Judge by the judgment under appeal recorded that the appellant resigned from service in the year 1985 whereas the appellant disputes the said fact. 3. The writ petition is filed by the appellant in the year 2010 seeking a declaration that the appellant is entitled to pension and other terminal benefits with 12% interest. In our view, apart from anything else, the writ petition is hopelessly barred by laches W.A.No.1182 of 2010 - 2 - and we do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. The writ appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.N.Ravindran, Judge vns