Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.GEORGE, THABORE HOUSE, KALPAYAM P.O. versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.GEORGE, THABORE HOUSE, KALPAYAM P.O. v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE - WP(C) No. 33126 of 2003(R) [2006] RD-KL 3410 (13 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 33126 of 2003(R)

1. V.GEORGE, THABORE HOUSE, KALPAYAM P.O.,
... Petitioner

2. C.RAJAYYAN, KULAMVETTIVIL VEEDU,

3. C.THANKAYYAN, MANJADIVILA VEEDU,

4. R.ACHUTHAN, ERATH PUTHANVEEDU,

5. Y.LAZAR, CHITALAMKODE MELE PUTHENVEEDU,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT LIVE STOCK

4. THE DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :13/12/2006

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

W.P.(C) Nos.33126 & 39780/2003, 8696 & 19515/2004 Dated 13th December, 2006.

J U D G M E N T

In all these cases, the petitioners are aggrieved since their casual labour service prior to the status of permanency is not counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. Rule 4(e)(iii) of the Agriculture Departmental Farm Workers' Pension Rules reads as follows :-

"200 days or more work in a calender year during the period of service spent as casual labourer in the departmental farms prior to permanency will be treated as one year qualifying for pension. The number of working days during the remaining period of casual service in the departmental farms will be added together and 200 each such days will be considered as one year qualifying service for pension." Learned Government Pleader submits that the casual service can be counted only in the case of those workers who do not have the minimum qualifying service of ten years/5 years for the purpose of pension and gratuity respectively. I am afraid, the contention cannot be appreciated. The rules do not give any such indication to the effect that the casual service is to be counted only in the case of those workers who do not have the minimum service of 10 years/5 years, as the case may be. Since the case of each WP NO.33126/03 & connected cases 2 petitioner has to be examined on the basis of facts, the writ petitions are disposed of as follows :- The petitioners are free to approach the controlling officer by way of an appropriate representation within two months from today. The said officer, on verification of the records will take appropriate action, in case the casual labour service claimed by the said petitioners have not been counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension/gratuity, within another two months. The question of interest is left open.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH, J

O.P.No. of 2002

J U D G M E N T

Dated 13th December, 2006.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.