IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY FRIDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2010 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WA.No. 1783 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5349/2009 Dated 22/07/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2 ----------------------------- STATE CO-OPERATIVE UNION,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,SAHAKARANA BHAVAN ,OTTUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENT(S): WRIT PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 3 --------------------------------------------------- 1. B.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR,BHARATHY VILAS, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. BABY CHERIYAN,2-RAJALEKSHMI NAGAR, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. REGISTRAR OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,STATUE PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,STATUE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 & 2 SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W. A. No. 1783 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge declaring the eligibility of the respondents for difference in arrears of pension from the date of retirement. We have heard senior counsel Sri. O.V. Radhakrishnan appearing for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Respondents were employed by the State Co-operative Union as Instructors under the Member Education Scheme in the year 1962. Both the respondents have retired in the year 1991. Since there was no pension scheme, respondents were not given any pension. However, Ext.P2 pension scheme was introduced and implemented in 1998 with effect from 1.7.1990. Admittedly respondents were in regular service from 1962 onwards. However, the State Co-operative Union did not make employer's contribution to the PF not only in respect of respondents, but also in respect of other employees until 1.10.1977. 2 Therefore by relying on clause 9(iii) of the Employees Pension Scheme, the State Co-operative Union contended that for the period during which there was no contribution of PF by the employer, such period shall not be computed for qualifying service for the purpose of pension. However, it is submitted by counsel for the respondents that non-payment of employer's contribution was later brought to the notice of the Government and the Government sanctioned the fund to the State Co-operative Union to pay the employer's contribution to PF for the respondents for the period from their joining service in 1962 till payment of contribution started on 1.10.1974. The payment of PF contribution later by the appellant entitles the respondents for pension by reckoning their service from 1962 onwards. Appellant also does not dispute the entitlement of respondents to reckon their service from 1962 onwards for the purpose of payment of pension. However, the short question arises for consideration is whether the respondents are entitled to claim arrears of pension. The learned single Judge held in their favour stating that once qualifying service is recognised from the date of joining service in 1962, both the respondents are entitled to get arrears of pension at the actual rate from the date of retirement in 1991. It is against this finding of the learned single Judge that the appellant 3 has come with this appeal. 3. After hearing both sides, we do not find any justification to interfere with the judgment of the learned single Judge because pension itself is granted in bulk in 1998. Though Ext.P2 was implemented from 1.7.1990, the period of service of respondents from 1962 to 1974 was not reckoned for the purpose of fixing pension because employer's contribution to PF was not made which was later transferred to Pension Scheme. Once this mistake is rectified that too with the funds provided by the Government, necessarily all consequences will follow, which is entitlement of respondents for pension at the applicable rate by reckoning their full qualifying service from 1962 onwards. So much so, they are entitled to get arrears of pension at the correct rate by reckoning their service on 1962 onwards. This is exactly what the learned single Judge has held, and since we find no ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned single Judge, Writ Appeal is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (BHABANI PRASAD RAY) Judge. kk 4