Annamma Chacko v. Kerala State Co-Op.Employees' Pension B.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/15TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1133 of 2006 (I) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER:

-------------------------- ANNAMMA CHACKO, KUDACKADU, MUTTAR, ALAPPUZHA-689 574.

BY ADV. SRI.A.KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS:

----------------------------

1. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE EMPLOYEE'S PENSION BOARD, P.B.NO.85, T.C.NO.27/156/157 CHINMAYA LANE, KUNNUNPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR/SECRETARY

2. THE MUTTAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUTTAR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. MUTTAR - 689 574 R1 BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.MOHANAN, SC, CO-OP. EMP. PENSION BOARD SRI.K.R.SUNIL, SC, CO-OP. EMP. PENSION BOARD R2 BY ADVS. SRI.RAVIDASAN.N.S.

SRI.C.HARIKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 1133 of 2006 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 :

COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.1.2003 P2 :

COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 21.06.2005 P3 :

COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.06.2005 P4 :

COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 04.07.2005 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- --------------------------------------- R1(A) :

G.O.(P) NO. 53/2001/CO-OP DATED 7TH MARCH 2001 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE

V. CHITAMBARESH, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 1133 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 05th day of January, 2015

JUDGMENT

The employee voluntarily retired from service even before attaining the age of superannuation. The employee is therefore in receipt of retiring pension only and not superannuation pension. The legal heirs of the employee are obviously not entitled to family pension as per Clause 23 of Ext. R1(A) pension scheme.

2.

The challenge to Ext. R1(A) pension scheme in this writ petition cannot be countenanced for more reasons than one. The Government of Kerala who issued Ext. R1(A) pension scheme has not been impleaded in the writ petition. The terms under which the employee retired from service voluntarily are also not brought out by any exhibit. The second respondent bank points out that the employee gave up all other benefits while voluntarily retiring from service.

I decline the jurisdiction and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE