Kerala High Court
Alizuamma.A vs The Accounts Officer on 18 January, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY,THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013/13TH BHADRA, 1935
W.A.No.1825 of 2010
--------------------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.No.17763 OF 1999 DATED 18-01-2008,
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
-----------------------
APPELLANT/ PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C):-
-------------------------------------------------------------
ALIZUAMMA.A,
U.P.S.A (RETIRED),
MANACKALAM, EDATHUA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.K.PAUL KURIAKOSE.
RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN THE W.P.(C):-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
ALAPPUZHA.
R1 TO R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-09-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
Manjula Chellur, C.J. &
K.Vinod Chandran, J.
----------------------------------------
W.A.No.1825 of 2010
-----------------------------------------
Dated this, the 4th day of September, 2013
JUDGMENT
K.Vinod Chandran,J.
The appellant, a retired Upper Primary School Assistant (for short "UPSA"), seeks reckoning of the break in periods of her service as qualifying service for the purpose of fixation of retirement benefits.
2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellant was appointed as a teacher for various broken periods of 2 or 3 months between 1974 and 1981. On 1.6.1981, she was appointed regularly as UPSA in an aided school and she continued in service till her superannuation on 31.03.1998. Hence, she had about 17 years regular service and she had also worked for various periods, presumably in leave vacancies, in different aided schools between 1974 and 1981. The appellant claimed 17 years regular service and also reckoning of the 7 years in which she had spent various periods in service and sought for determining the period of interruptions in service also as qualifying service. While in total the appellant sought more than 24 years qualifying service, the respondents granted W.A.No.1825 of 2010 - 2 - only 20 years qualifying service, computing only the period of actual service in aided schools before 1981.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would urge before us that the denial of her claim was made on the ground that Government Decision No.8 under Rule 14E of Part III of Kerala Service Rules ("KSR" for short) provided for counting the period of break, only where the appointment before the break was not provisional or for limited period and the break was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution. This, according to the appellant, was a decision which was inserted with effect from 17.07.1984 by G.O.(P).344/84/Fin. It is the contention that the period of her actual service with intermittent breaks was before 1981 and the said decision would not be applicable to the case of the appellant. It is contended that Rule 31 of Part III KSR mandates interruptions in the service of an employee to be counted for pension, provided the same is not prohibited by the rules or by the competent authority. Note 3 of Rule 31 places such interruptions in service exceeding one year beyond the scope of Rule 31 and the appellant's interruptions at no point of time having exceeded one year, she is entitled to be granted qualifying service as sought for. W.A.No.1825 of 2010 - 3 -
4. We extract Government Decision No.8 under Rule 14E and Rule 31 hereunder:
"8(i). The benefit of counting periods of break as per Note 3 below Rule 31, Part III, Kerala Service Rules will be allowed in cases where the appointment before the break was not provisional or for limited period and the break was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution.
(ii) In cases not covered by (i) above the actual period of service excluding the periods of break will be reckoned for qualifying service.
(iii) In cases covered by (i) above the certificate that termination of appointment was due to reduction of staff strength of the institution should be countersigned by the pension sanctioning authority or Head of the Departments".
31. Interruptions.- Interruptions in the service of an employee will count for pension provided it is not specifically laid down in these rules or otherwise ordered by competent authority and recorded accordingly in the Service Book.
Note 3.- In cases where the period of an interruption in service exceeds one year, the benefit of reckoning the period of such interruption in service shall be restricted to the periods he was actually in service prior to the date of the interruption".
W.A.No.1825 of 2010 - 4 - Rule 31 is under Section III, with the heading "Suspension, Resignation and Interruption in Service". The interruption in service contemplated in Rule 31 is that of regular service. The appellant undisputedly came into the regular service only on 1.6.1981. The appellant's claim is with respect to her service as a teacher in various aided schools on leave vacancies spanning over a period of seven years. Understood in the context of the interpretation placed on Rule 31; the appellant cannot have any claim for treating her period of service in leave vacancy nor the period of interruptions as qualifying service based on Rule 31. The claim of the appellant can only be under Rule 14E of Part III KSR, by which aided school service put in by Government employees prior to entry in Government service qualifies for pension. Hence, the aided school service put in by the appellant before she entered into regular service would necessarily qualify. The claim of the appellant is that Government Decision No.8 cannot have any application to her, since the same was introduced only on 17.07.1984. We have to immediately notice that before 17.07.1984, Government Decision No.2 read as follows:
"The actual period of service in aided schools only will count".W.A.No.1825 of 2010 - 5 -
This was deleted by Government Order dated 22.08.1985 with effect from 17.07.1984. Hence, even going by Government Decision No.2, which was available at the time the appellant rendered service in leave vacancies, only the actual period of service could be counted for qualifying service.
In the circumstances detailed above, we are of the opinion that the judgment of the learned Single Judge is not liable to be interfered with. We dismiss the appeal, however, leaving the parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran, Judge.
vku/-
( true copy )