JUDGMENT : DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J. 1. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions apprehend that the corpus of the Pension Fund, under the provisions of the Kerala Cooperative Societies Employees Self-Financing Pension Scheme, 1994, as also that of the year 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1994 Scheme and ‘2005 Scheme’ for short, respectively), is likely to be transferred to the State Treasury, as per the instructions of the Government of Kerala. They, therefore, pray that the Kerala State Co-operative Employees Pension Board (‘Pension Board’ for short), which administers the afore Corpus, be directed not to use it for any purpose, other than disbursement of pension. 2. Interestingly, in response to the afore submissions of the petitioners, as made by their respective counsel in the various Writ Petitions, Sri. P.P. Thajudheen - learned Special Government Pleader, submitted that the cause projected in these Writ Petitions appears to be edificed on certain Newspaper reports, which are not accurate or true. He argued that, even though Clause 32 of the ‘1994 Scheme’ and Clause 22 of the ‘2005 Scheme’ permits and authorizes the Government to invest the ‘Corpus Fund’ in such manner as is statutorily enumerated, no decision in that regard has been taken by the Government as of now. He, therefore, prayed that these Writ Petitions be dismissed, as being filed based on conjectures and surmises. 3. Pertinently, Sri. M. Sasindran - learned Standing Counsel for the ‘Pension Board’ also affirmed that his client has not received any instruction from the Government as feared by the petitioners and that all such are merely speculative. He reiterated that the Pension Board has not taken any decision to transfer the Corpus to any investment and that all such assertions are without basis. 4. No doubt, the afore submissions of the learned Special Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel settle the apprehensions of the petitioners fully. 5. Prima-facie, I cannot find favour with the petitioners for another reason, namely that it is incomprehensible how an investment of the ‘Corpus Fund’ can be made by its transfer into the ‘State Treasury’ since this does not appear to be authorised by the Schemes; nor can it be normally seen to be ‘investment’ to obtain growth. However, this is not an issue I intend to answer affirmatively, it being not required at this stage. 6. However, this is not an issue I intend to answer affirmatively, it being not required at this stage. 6. In the afore circumstances, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, recording the afore submissions of the learned Special Government Pleader; however, leaving open every contention, so as to enable the petitioners to impel in future, should the Government or the ‘Pension Board’ take any decision as apprehended by them.