IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21908 of 2008(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ KOCHUMMEN.V, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, JUNIOR ENGINEER (RETD), KSEB, ELE.MAJOR SECTION, MANIPUZHA, RESIDING AT PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, CHENNITHALA SOUTH P.O, MAVELIKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.MOHAMMED SHIRAZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,REP;BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), K.S.E.B, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM PALACE P.O, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KSEB, THIRUVALLA. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB R1 TO R3BY ADV . MR. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21908/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EB2/SE/VR/103/2000-01/53. DT. 23.2.01. P2:- COPY OF THE PA.IX PPO 29619 DT. 1.2.03. P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 4.3.08 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 3.6.08. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GB3/2004-05/391 DT. 4.6.04 OF 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO: 21908 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner was an employee under the first respondent Board. He was working as Junior Engineer and while so he applied for three years leave without allowance from 15.03.1996 for getting employment abroad. He went abroad and took up employment in a private company in U.S.A. in 1996. His wife expired on 12.02.1997 and thereafter even though he sought for extension of leave in 1999 for one year, that was not granted. This compelled him to join duty and thereafter, he applied for voluntary retirement and was permitted to retire with effect from 01.06.1999. Ext.P1 is the sanction accorded to the petitioner to retire from Board’s Service voluntarily with effect from 1.6.1999. 2. He was sanctioned pension and other terminal benefits as per Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, in spite of repeated requests being made, the same was not disbursed. The petitioner remained in U S A for some more time and returned to India for good in 2007. By Ext.P3, he was directed to produce a non employment certificate. As per Ext.P4, he has filed a reply stating that he is not employed elsewhere. Since there was no reply to Ext.P4, he has filed this writ petition seeking for appropriate directions in the matter. WPC:21908 OF 2008 2 3. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The stand taken is that even though the pensionary benefits was sanctioned during February, 2003, he did not avail the benefits till 2008. The counter affidavit refers to Rules 106, 107 and 135 of Part III, KSR to contend for the position that the petitioner did not produce the non employment certificate duly attested by Indian Embassy in USA after accepting voluntary retirement and that as three years have gone after sanctioning the pension, the pension ceases to be payable. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the Board. In the reply affidavit, the petitioner has produced Ext.P5 a letter dated 4.6.2004 from the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Thiruvalla to the Accounts Officer Pension Section, O/o the Chief Engineer (HRM), KSEB, Thiruvananthapuram. The letter records the fact that petitioner was directed from that office to submit vouchers for disbursement of pension but he turned up in the office on 31.5.2004, stating that he could not come as he is in USA. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the contention that he did not take steps to claim terminal benefits from February, 2003 to 25.2.2008 is not correct. There is great force in the above submission. It is evident from Ext.P5 that he had approached the office of the Executive Engineer in person on 31.5.2004. WPC:21908 OF 2008 3 5. In that view of the matter, the reliance placed on Rule 135 to show that pension ceases to be payable will not survive. Rule 132- providing for Certificate of Non-Employment in Part III of the KSR shows that the pensioner drawing pension is required to append to the bill a certificate as follows “I declare that I have not received any remuneration for serving in any capacity in a Government establishment or in an establishment paid from local fund during the period for which the amount of pension claimed unless bill is due”. It is admitted that the petitioner has produced such a certificate. Therefore, the said provision has been complied with. Objection raised on Rules 106 and 107 Part III KSR does not survive, as they refer to the procedure for accepting any commercial employment, or an employment under a Government within or outside India. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to disburse the monthly pension and other benefits sanctioned as per Ext.P2 along with arrears within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Even though the petitioner claim interest, I am not satisfied, that this is a case which warrants granting of interest. The writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE