IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 OP.No. 16879 of 1999(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- V. SREENIVASAN, RETIRED CHARGEMAN, KSRTC, VELIKKAL HOUSE, 22/1119 A, WEST MANKAVE.P.O., THIRUVANNOOR NADA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM. R1 BY MR. JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC, KSRTC. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 16879/1999-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: P.1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P. NO. 18205/98 DT. 23/09/98. P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. PLB7-048205/98, DTD. 10/05/99. P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. PLB/7/010268/98, DT. 12/01/99. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No.16879 of 1999 ================== Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a retired employee of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. He retired from service on 31.7.1997. Prior to entering the service of the KSRTC, the petitioner had provisional service. The petitioner's grievance in this original petition is that that provisional service is not being taken into account for the purpose of calculating his pensionery benefits. 2. The contention of the KSRTC is that that provisional service is computable for the purpose of fixing retirement benefits only as per the settlement entered into in 1999, between the KSRTC and the unions of employees. Since the petitioner retried prior to 1999, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of that settlement. The contention of the petitioner is that even prior to 1999 also provisional service was reckonable for the purpose of pension in so far as the Kerala Service Rules have been made applicable to the employees of the KSRTC also. As per the Government orders issued under the KSR, provisional service prior to 1.10.1994 is to be reckoned for the purpose of calculating pensionary benefits. The answer of the KSRTC to the same is that although KSR has been made applicable, the Government order issued under the KSR has not been specifically adopted by the KSRTC. Therefore, the same cannot be applied for the purpose of computing retirement benefits due to the petitioner, is the contention raised by the counsel for the KSRTC. o.p.16879/99 2 3. I have considered the rival arguments in detail. 4. As is clear from Order No.PLB5.30232/84. dated 5.5.1984 issued by the KSRTC, Government letter No.26700/A1/82/TF&P dated 27.3.1984 authroises the Corporation to pay pension to its employees as per KSR. Further, in respect of the employees retired from 1999 onwards, going by the decision of this Court in Idicula Abraham v. KSRTC and Ors. [2005 (2) KLT 602], provisional service is to be computed for the purpose of fixing retirement benefits due to the employees of the KSRTC. The Supreme Court has in several decisions held that for the purpose of retirement benefits, fixation of cut of dates would be discriminatory. In any event, since the KSR is made applicable to the employees of the KSRTC, the petitioner would be entitled to computation of provisional service also for the purpose of pension. In the above circumstances, even without going into the question as to whether without the Government orders issued under the KSR having been specifically adopted by the KSRTC, such orders are applicable to the employees of the KSRTC, I direct that the petitioner be paid retirement benefits taking into account his provisional service also. Orders in this regard shall be passed and arrears disbursed within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No.16879 of 1999-H ================== J U D G M E N T 26th March, 2009