Kerala High Court
V.K.Prabhakara Panicker vs Union Of India on 22 October, 2024
1
W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
2024:KER:78430
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14845 OF 2019
PETITIONER:
V.K.PRABHAKARA PANICKER
AGED 76 YEARS, S/O.KESAVA PILLAI,
(EX-STORE KEEPER GR.II/GENERAL RESERVE
ENGINEER FORCE/NOW BORDER ROAD ORGANISATION)
RESIDING AT JEETH NIVAS, THEKKE MALAYIL HOUSE,
CHENGAROOR P.O, VIA MALLAPPALLY, TIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689594.
BY ADVS.
T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY
SMT.KALA T.GOPI
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE,
SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.
2 THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY,
NEW DELHI-110001.
3 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL,
BORDER ROADS, SEEMA SADAK BHAVAN,
RING ROAD, DELHI, CANTT, NEW DELHI-110001.
4 THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
HQ CE(P), DANTAK, C/O 99 APO.
5 THE OFFICER-IN-CAHRGE,
60 ROAD CONSTRUCTION COPY(GREF)
C/O. 99 APO.
2
W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
2024:KER:78430
6 THE RECORD OFFICER,
GREFF RECORDS, DIGHI CAMP P.O,
PUNE-411015.
BY ADV.
SRI.HARIDAS P.NAIR, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
2024:KER:78430
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, aged 81 years, points out that he was employed with GREF (General Reserve Engineer Force) on a temporary basis from 1961-1967 and upon reappointment from 1968 - 1982, when the petitioner was removed from the services. The petitioner points out that, on account of the above, he is entitled for the compassionate allowance with reference to provisions under Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the '1972 Rules' for short). The said claim raised by the petitioner stood rejected pursuant to Exts.P4, P6 and P7, pointing out that the petitioner did not have the required service of 20 years and was only having a service of 19 years, 02 months and 15 days, and also on account of the fact that the petitioner was removed from service on disciplinary grounds.
2. The afore proceedings were the subject matter of challenge before the Central Administrative Tribunal, and by 4 W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019 2024:KER:78430 Ext.P14 dated 27.03.2019, the learned Tribunal found that the Tribunal does not have powers with respect to the present grievance with reference to the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
3. It is in the afore situation that the captioned writ petition is filed by the petitioner, challenging Exts.P4, P6 and P7.
4. I have heard Smt.Kala T. Gopi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Haridas P. Nair, the learned Central Government Counsel.
5. It is noticed that the petitioner had specifically raised a claim with reference to the provisions under Rule 41 of the 1972 Rules. The said claim was rejected only on account of the fact that the petitioner did not have the 20 year minimum required service for getting the compassionate allowance, according to the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the provisions under Rule 49 of the 1972 Rules, points out that the petitioner only required to have a minimum service of 10 years as against the demand of 20 years made in the impugned orders. 5 W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
2024:KER:78430
6. It appears that the claim of the petitioner has not been addressed, with reference to the afore contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel relies on Ext.P12 judgment of the Apex Court and Ext.P13 judgment of the High Court of New Delhi.
7. In the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that the matter requires to be considered at the hands of the respondents herein.
In such circumstances, this writ petition would stand disposed of as under;
i. The petitioner to file a fresh representation, pointing out the facts and figures as also placing reliance on the relevant provisions of the 1972 Rules and the applicable judgments, before the 2nd respondent within a period of three weeks from today.
ii. If such an application / representation is submitted by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the said application, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a 6 W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019 2024:KER:78430 period of four months thereafter. iii. So as to facilitate the 2nd respondent to act in the above manner, the impugned orders at Exts.P4, P6 and P7 would stand set aside.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE anm 7 W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019 2024:KER:78430 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14845/2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SERVICE PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 26 SEP 1961 TO 25 SEP 1967, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF SERVICE PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 30 AP4 1968 TO 15 JUL 1981, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.2412/GEN/35/NER(B-12) DATED 05 NOV 2009, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.2412/GEN/58/NER(B-12) DATED 27 SEP 2010, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 11 AUG 2011 IN HRMP NO.1229/2011 RENDERED BY THE KERALA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NO.15175/DGBR/RO/VKPP/30/E1CC DATED 22 APR 2014 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.1141/VKPP/60/123/E1C DATED 30.07.2015, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE PRIME MINISTER, DATED 26 MAY 2014.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.2412/GEN/185/NER (B-12) DATED 14 MAY 2016, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
8W.P.(C) No.14845 of 2019
2024:KER:78430 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 05.09.17 SUBMITTED TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE EXTRACT OF RULE 41 OF THE CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 AND ALSO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DECISIONS GIVEN BELOW THE SAID RULE AS CONTAINED IN SWAMYS PENSION COMPILATION INCORPORATING CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF DECISION OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN MAHINDER DUTT SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS REPORTED IN AIR 2014 SC 2009.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN WPC NO.20885/2005 DATED 06.04.2011 (ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE VS.MS.ANJU) EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO.180/216/2018 DATED 27.03.2019 RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R1(a) CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 09 JUL 1981 Exhibit R1(b) TRUE COPY STATEMENT DATED 22 DEC 1980 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit R1(C) THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 09 AUG 2001 Exhibit R1(d) THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 09 AUG 2001 Exhibit R1(e) CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17 DEC 2010 DELIVERED IN O.A.NO 1071/2010 BY HON'BLE CAT ERNAKULAM Exhibit R1(f) THE TRUE COPIES OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF RULE 41 OF CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 Exhibit R1(g) COPIES OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF RULE 24 OF CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972