Kerala High Court
B. Gopichandran Nair vs Kerala State Road Transport ... on 13 January, 2020
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941
WP(C).No.632 OF 2020(D)
PETITIONER:
B. GOPICHANDRAN NAIR,
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. R.BHASKARAN, CONDUCTOR (SELECTION GRADE) (RETD.), KERALA
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY
DEPOT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND RESIDING AT MURALEERAVAM,
CHITTAZHA, VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM - 695 028
BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023
REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
2 THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CITY DEPOT,
THIRUVANANATHAPURAM - 695 001
BY SRI. T.P SAJAN, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2020,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).No.632 of 2020 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to grant him his pensionary benefits by counting his provisional service from 28.12.1979 to 07.03.2001 along with the regular service from 08.03.2001 to 31.12.2014. It is pointed out that the issue already stands covered in favour of the petitioner through the Larger Bench decision of this Court in K.L.Francis Vs. K.S.R.T.C and Another [2015 (2) KHC (1)].
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that against the decision of this Court in K.L.Francis's case (supra), the respondents have preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court.
4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar and t aking note of the submission of the learned Standing counsel for the respondents, I W.P(C).No.632 of 2020 3 dispose the Writ Petition with a direction to the respondents to reckon the provisional service of the petitioner along with his regular service for the purposes of computation of his pensionary benefits in accordance with the decision of this Court in K.L.Francis's case (supra). It is made clear that the grant of the benefits to the petitioner shall be subject to the outcome of the special leave petition preferred by the respondents before the Supreme Court.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns W.P(C).No.632 of 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PAGE NO.16 OF THE SERVICE BOOK OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PAGE NO.15 OF THE SERVICE BOOK OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.E1/2591/02/VKBN DATED 19/9/2002 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, VIKAS BHAVAN EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION SLIP OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER NO.PA6/003429/15 DATED 16/2/2015 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER (IA).
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 9/12/2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16/10/2019 W.P.(C).NO.4102/2019 (R.HARIDASAN PILLAI VS. KSRTC AND ANOTHER).
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE