Kerala High Court
A.B. Subramanyan vs Kerala State Co-Operative Employees' ... on 21 March, 1984
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY,THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/19TH PHALGUNA, 1935
WP(C).No. 19812 of 2013 (B)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
---------------------
A.B. SUBRAMANYAN
AMBALASSERIL HOUSE, CHERIYAZHIKKAL,
KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN
SMT.I.VINAYAKUMARI
SRI.K.N.AJAYAN
SRI.K.S.ARUNDAS
RESPONDENTS :
--------------------------
1. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEES' PENSION BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, P.B.NO.85, KALA NIVAS
T.C.27/156, 157, CHINMAYA LANE
KUNNUMPURAM, NEAR AYURVEDA COLLEGE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
2. ALAPPAD PANCHAYATH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.Q.268
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, CHERIAZHEEKAL P.O.
PIN-690 573, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-03-2014,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 19812 of 2013 (B)
----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE
DATED 21.3.1984.
EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE FORMAT USED FOR REMITTING OF RS.20,645/-
IN RESPECT OF THE PETTIONER.
EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER NO.711/KLM OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3.6.09 IN WPC NO.6018/08.
EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 18.8.2009 ISSUED TO
MR.PRAKASAN.
EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.3.2013 IN WPC
NO.230/2010.
EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.5.2013 OF THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
---------------------------------------------------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Mn
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
----------------------------------------
W.P.(C).NO. 19812 OF 2013
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of March, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner claims to have been employed in the 2nd respondent bank from 01.07.1981 to 31.10.2008. The petitioner, hence, has a claim of 27 years and 3 months service, for the purpose of computation of pension, as per the Pension Scheme operated by the 1st respondent Board. The petitioner's contention is that while reckoning the date of entry into the service and the date of entry in to the Contributory Provident Fund, only the period commencing from 01.03.1984 was taken into account. The petitioner, hence, claims the period of service between 01.07.1981 to the end of February 1984, also to be reckoned for the purpose of pension. The petitioner also relies on Exhibits P4 and P6 Judgments with respect to two other employees of the very same bank.
2. The petitioners in Exhibits P4 and P5 also contended that their pension has to be computed taking into account their service from 01.01.1974, the date on which the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme was introduced in the respondent bank. By two separate judgments, the effect of Clause 19 of the Scheme was considered and it was found that when there is a pre-existing Provident Fund Scheme W.P.(C).NO. 19812 OF 2013 2 implemented in a Society and contributions made thereon, which contribution has been transferred to the Pension Fund, such period also will qualify for pension. Hence, this Court had, in the aforesaid judgments, directed that the services of the petitioners therein, for the purpose of pension, ought to be reckoned from 01.01.1974, being the date of commencement of the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme in the respondent bank.
3. It is to be noticed that both the petitioners in the aforesaid judgments entered service before 01.01.1974, whereas in the case of the petitioner, he is said to have joined on 01.07.1981. Necessarily, at that point of time, there would have been a Contributory Provident Fund, applicable in the respondent bank and there is no escape from the binding precedents of Exhibits P4 and P6, which has not been challenged by the Pension Board.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Board, however, points out that, with respect to the petitioner, his appointment to a full time regular post, even according to the document produced by the petitioner, is as on 01.07.1982 and not on 01.07.1981. Definitely, such a contention was not urged in the case of the other two employees, since they had been appointed long prior to the date of introduction of the Contributory Provident Fund in the respondent bank. Looking at Rule 2 (f) of the Pension Scheme, the petitioner's entitlement for being W.P.(C).NO. 19812 OF 2013 3 considered for pension under the Pension Scheme would only, hence, arise from 01.07.1982. But for the above distinction, this Court does not find any distinction from the facts pleaded and accepted by this Court in Exhibit P4 and P6 and the instant case. In such circumstance, there shall be a direction to the Pension Board to treat the petitioner's service from 01.07.1982 as pensionable service and release pension, in accordance with the same. The arrears of pension, due to the petitioner also shall be released within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. If any deficit is found in the contributions, necessarily, the Pension Board would have to raise a demand against the 2nd respondent which the 2nd respondent bank would be bound to comply with.
The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE // True Copy // P.A. To Judge DSV/10/03 W.P.(C).NO. 19812 OF 2013 4