IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1390 of 2010(W) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- S.V.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, `KRISHNA', NEAR KANATHOOR MAHAVISHNU TEMPLE, KANATHOOR, PALLIKUNNU, KANNUR-4. RETD.FROM TALUK PANCHAYAT, THALASSERY, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FINANCE (PRC-C) DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 039. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MANOJ KUMAR, FINANCE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs WP(C).No. 1390/2010(W) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/10/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS. P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12/05/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.SR.DAG(A)C.CELL/ RTI-329/2009-10/953 DATED 07/12/2009. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E1.64918/80 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27/08/1981. P5: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.48/89/FIN. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 26/07/1989. P6: COPY OF THE ORDER OF A.G.(A&E)NO.P.CELL/REV./PRE.7/ 04/180997/09 - 10/647, 648 DATED 03/04/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE svs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 1390 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner retired from service of the Government of Kerala on 31.05.1985 as Taluk Panchayat Officer. Subsequent to the retirement of the petitioner, the post of Taluk Panchayat Officer was abolished. According to the petitioner, while he was in service the post of Taluk Panchayat Officer was a promotion post for the post of Special Executive Officer/Special Grade Secretary. The petitioner submits that the pension now he is getting is only equivalent to the pension payable to a Special Grade Secretary which was a lower post to the post of Taluk Panchayat Officer, which the petitioner was holding at the time of his retirement. The petitioner contends that the same is a very serious anomaly affecting the fundamental rights of the petitioner under Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. According to the petitioner, since the W.P.(C)No. 1390 of 2010 -2- post of Taluk Panchayat Officer was a higher post to that as Special Grade Secretary that difference should reflect in the retirement benefits payable also. The petitioner would contend that in the special circumstances of the case the petitioner should have been paid pension corresponding to the pension being payable to the next higher post of Assistant Director of Panchayat. 2. The learned Government Pleader would submit that, the method of computing pension in respect of posts which were abolished after retirement of the incumbent is laid down in paragraph 3.9 of G.O.(P) No.180/06/Fin dated 18.04.2006 which reads as follows: “3.9. If the post held by the pensioner at the time of retirement/death while in service is no longer in existence in the Department from which he retired or if the entire categories to which the pensioner belonged have moved over to other scales of pay (such as, for example, UGC/AICTE/Central Judicial Service scales) after his retirement/death while in service or if the designation of the post has changed in such a way that it is no longer possible to ascertain as to which is the revised scale corresponding to the post from which the pensioner/employee retired/died while in service, the revised basic pension shall be fixed based on the corresponding scale of pay, over successive pay revisions, as indicated in Schedule 3.” The learned Government Pleader points out that, in view of W.P.(C)No. 1390 of 2010 -3- the peculiar situation, the petitioner is being paid pension in accordance with the revised scale of pay corresponding to the scale of pay the petitioner was receiving as Taluk Panchayat Officer and the petitioner cannot aspire to get anything more. But the counsel for the petitioner submits that, that pension is only equivalent to the pension payable to the Special Grade Secretary which according to the petitioner is an anomaly which requires to be corrected appropriately. 3. I am not going into the merits of the rival contentions insofar as the petitioner has already invoked the jurisdiction of the Government in the matter by filing Ext.P1 representation. For the present the petitioner would be satisfied with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 as expeditiously as possible. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 as expeditiously as W.P.(C)No. 1390 of 2010 -4- possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/