Smt. Chandrika. M.M v. State Bank Of Travancore
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/6TH ASWINA, 1937 RP.No. 774 of 2015 (H) ------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO. 15474/2015 DATED 20-08-2015) -------------- REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/WRIT PETITIONER :
------------------------------------------------------------------
1. SMT. CHANDRIKA M.M., W/O.K.A. GOPALAN, AGED 59 YEARS, KARIMUNDAKKAL HOUSE, THOTTUMKATHARA ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI -20
2. G.SASIDHARAN NAIR, TC- 6/1140, BINDU VIHAR, KALATHIPURA LANE, KANJIRAMPARA P.O, TRIVANDRUM -30 BY SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADVS. SMT.K.S.SANTHI SMT.LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :
----------------------------------------------------
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, HEAD OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN-695 001
2. GENERAL MANAGER (OPERATIONS), STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, HEAD OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695 001.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-09-2015,ALONG WITH R.P.NO.775/2015 AND R.P.NO.778/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
............................................................. R.P.No.775 of 2015 in W.P.(C).NO.15193 of 2015, R.P.No.774 of 2015 in W.P.(C).NO.15474 of 2015, & R.P.No.778 of 2015 in W.P.(C).NO.23833 of 2015, ............................................................. Dated this the 28th day of September, 2015
O R D E R
Taking note of the averments in the review petition and the contentions of counsel for the review petitioners, I recall the judgment dated 20.08.2015 and dispose these writ petitions as follows:
The issue involved in these writ petitions is squarely covered in favour of the petitioners by the judgment dated 14.03.2014 in W.P.(C).No.26563 of 2012, as affirmed by Ext.P12 judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.Nos.937 & 947 of 2014. Accordingly, the impugned orders in these writ petitions, that decline pension to the petitioners on the ground that, they did not have the required qualifying service for the grant of pension, are quashed and it is declared that, the petitioners are entitled for pension in accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench referred to above.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns