Kerala High Court
V.K. Abdul Azeez vs Kerala State Road Transport ...
Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 2360 of 2007
----------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
V.K. ABDUL AZEEZ,
VARIKKATTU HOUSE, A.K.G.ROAD,
MARKET P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA.,
(RETIRED CONDUCTOR, KSRTC).
BY ADV.SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
K.S.R.T.C., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SHRI JOHNSON P.JOHN, SC
SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA, SC
SRI.JOY GEORGE, SC
SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K. GOPAL
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 15-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 2360 of 2007
----------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
----------------------
EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER NO.36990,
OF THE PETITIONER.
EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.6.06
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.PA9.011226/06 DATED 13.7.06 OF
THE FIRST RESPONDENT (SIGNED BY ASST. PERSONNEL OFFICER (PA),
K.S.R.T.C.)
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
----------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
mbr/
26.03.2018.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
**********************************************************************
W.P.(C) No.2360 of 2007
**********************************************************************
Dated this the 15th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner retired from Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'KSRTC') as senior assistant having service of 29 years and 8 days. The petitioner claims full pension. However, KSRTC calculated the petitioner's service as 28 years, ten months and eight days which was rounded to 29 years. It appears that the petitioner's past service on daily wages was also reckoned for the purpose of qualifying service. The petitioner had only performed duty less than ten days on daily wages period in March, 1978 and April, 1979. Those periods were reckoned for calculating qualifying service. According to the petitioner, in March, 1978, he had 19 days service and in April, 1979, he was granted special disability leave.
W.P.(C) No.2360 of 2007 2
In fact, as seen from the impugned order, those aspects had not been adverted. In such circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The second respondent is directed to reconsider the matter afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needful shall be done within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln