IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 16217 of 2007(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- D.AMBIKA DEVI, U.D.ASSISTANT (HIGHER GRADE), KERALA ARTISANS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., HEAD OFFICE, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.AJAY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,(REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY), INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, THE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA ARTISANS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., (REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR), HEAD OFFICE, LAW COLLEGE JN., VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY FOR R2 SMT.N.SANTHA FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C.NO.16217/2007 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DT. 10.10.1984. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KADCO/ESTT-052/99 DT. 23.7.99. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.33968/C1/84/ID DT. 26.4.1985. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KADCO-E1-1013/86 DT. 27.2.1987, EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM THE MEMBERS HAND BOOK PUBLISHED BYTHE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF KPSC'S LETTER NO.A111(3) 1260/99/GW DT. 13.5.2005. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE SPECIAL RULES AS APPROVED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT AND SUBMITTED TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR APPROVAL. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.56/96/ID DT. 11.3.1996. EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DT. 24.1.2007. EXT.P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC 6013/07 DT. 12.3.2007. EXT.P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.6153/E3/07 ID DT. 19.4.2007 FROM THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.24160/05 DT. 15.3.2007. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16217 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 5th March, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner was an employee of the second respondent Corporation. Her date of birth is 25.5.1952. In the matter of superannuation, Rule 60, Part I Kerala Service Rules was being followed by the Corporation. If that be so, the date of superannuation of the petitioner was, 31.5.2007. But, the Government have instructed the Corporation, it is submitted, to frame its own rules. It is also submitted that the draft rules are ready, in which the age of retirement is provided as 58 years. It appears, the file concerning the matter is shuttling between the Corporation and the Government, without the same being finalised. The learned counsel for the second respondent Corporation submitted that the matter is still pending before the Government. Whatever be that, on the date the writ petitioner attained the age of 55 years, i.e., 31.5.2007, Rule 60, Part I Kerala Service Rules was being followed by the Corporation, in the matter of superannuation. This Court, by Ext.P10 judgment WA NO.16217/07 2 dated 12.3.2007, directed the Government, to take a decision on the question of enhancement of retirement age of the employees of the second respondent Corporation. The Government considered the matter and issued Ext.P11 communication dated 19.4.2007, stating that the matter is under consideration of the Government. In the meantime, a Division Bench of this Court rendered Ext.P12 judgment dated 15.3.2007, holding that the retirement age of the employees of the Kerala Beverages Corporation should be enhanced to 58 years. In the above background, the writ petitioner approached this Court, on the eve of her retirement, i.e. on 28.5.2007, claiming appropriate reliefs. Since this Court did not grant any effective interim relief, she retired from service on 31.5.2007. This Writ Petition was moved today, seeking a direction for getting the terminal benefits. It is pointed out that even though she retired three years back, so far, the terminal benefits due to her have not been released. The second respondent is directed to settle the claim of the petitioner for the terminal benefits, as per the rules in force, on the date of her superannuation. Having regard to the facts of the case, we WA NO.16217/07 3 think, it is not necessary to keep the Writ Petition pending. If the retirement age of the employees of the second respondent Corporation is enhanced, and the petitioner is eligible to claim the benefit of it, the disposal of this Writ Petition will not affect her rights, if any, in this regard. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is closed. I.A.No.8002/09 : Dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16217 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 5th March, 2010.