Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 2736 (KER)

State of Kerala v. Mathew George S/o T. G. George

2025-11-03

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.

body2025
JUDGMENT : Anil K. Narendran, J. 1. The respondents in W.P.(C)No.30675 of 2024 have filed this writ appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 , challenging the judgment dated 20.02.2025 of the learned Single Judge in that writ petition, which was one filed by the petitioners (respondents herein), who are the son and daughter of late Annamma Zacharia, who was receiving pension after her retirement as HSA in an aided school. The writ petition was filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P6 letter dated 22.11.2022 issued by the 5 th respondent District Treasury Officer (5 th appellant herein) and Ext.P10 letter dated 17.06.2023 and Ext.P11 letter dated 04.08.2023 issued by the 2 nd respondent Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Finance Department (2 nd appellant herein) to the extent it is adverse to the petitioners, the same being unjust, arbitrary and violative of the provisions of Part III Kerala Service Rules (KSR) and also against Article 14 of the Constitution of India; a declaration that the legal heirs of a pensioner are entitled to receive the balance pension with all arrears after the death of the pensioner, on intimation about the death, and producing the death certificate; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to dispose of Exts.P5, P7, P15, P16, P18 and P19 representations by sanctioning the pension arrears from May 2019 to July 2021, reckoning the pension revision orders of 2014 and 2019, with interest on a reasonable rate, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, in accordance with law. 2. In the writ petition, the 4 th respondent Director of Treasuries filed a counter affidavit dated 18.12.2024, opposing the reliefs sought for. After considering the rival contentions, the learned Single Judge, by the judgment dated 20.02.2025, disposed of the writ petition quashing Exts.P6, P10 and P11 and by declaring that the petitioners are entitled to receive the balance pension with arrears, after the death of the pensioner. It was ordered that consequential benefits shall be made available to the petitioners, by the 2 nd respondent (2 nd appellant herein) within a period of three months and that while computing a arrears of pension payable, the pay revision affected for the period shall also be taken into account. Paragraphs 12 to 15 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus: “12. Paragraphs 12 to 15 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus: “12. After the retirement of the mother, the pension was sanctioned as per Ext.P2 order dated 18.10.1990. The petitioners would contend that their mother suffered Toponin I Positive Acute Coronary Syndrome on 24.03.2015. The petitioners’ mother used to receive pension through State Bank of India. The age related ailments and the Covid-19 pandemic restricted movements of the pensioner outside the house. During that time, it was impossible for the pensioner to go to the Treasury or Bank. Therefore, mustering could not be done. The last mustering was done on 30.12.2016 only. Noting that mustering was not done, the pension was credited to the pensioner’s account till April, 2019. The petitioners are before this Court for disbursement of arrears of pension accruing thereafter. 13. Senior Government Pleader resisted the writ petition and submitted that as long as mustering is not done, the pensioner is not entitled to get pension. The pensioner in this case had long abstained from mustering since the year 2016. If the pensioner was not able to move out of her house, she could have easily availed the option of making a Life Certificate from an authority concerned as provided in the Kerala Treasury Code Volume I, Rule 280(a). That was not done. 14. From the facts of the case, I find that the petitioners’ mother died on 20.07.2021. The last mustering of the pensioner was done on 30.12.2016. It is to be noted that two devastating Floods in Kerala in the years 2018 and 2019 and also Covid-19 pandemic affected the movement of even healthy people. It was in such circumstances that the pensioner could not muster. The fact that the pensioner has passed away soon after the Covid-19 period, on 20.07.2021 is an indicator to the fact that the petitioners’ mother was not in a position to move out or do anything in order to make mustering. 15. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts of this case, I am of the view that the relief is to be granted to the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of quashing Exts.P6, P10 and P11 and declaring that the petitioners are entitled to receive the balance pension with arrears after the death of the pensioner. 15. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts of this case, I am of the view that the relief is to be granted to the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of quashing Exts.P6, P10 and P11 and declaring that the petitioners are entitled to receive the balance pension with arrears after the death of the pensioner. Consequential benefits shall be made available to the petitioners by the 2 nd respondent within a period of three months. While computing the pension, the pay revision effected during the period should also be taken into account.” 3. This writ appeal was filed along with C.M.Appl.No.1 of 2025 seeking condonation of filing delay of 184 days, which was condoned by the order dated 21.10.2025. 4. Heard arguments of the learned Senior Government Pleader for the appellants-respondents and the learned counsel for the respondents-petitioners. 5. During the course of arguments, the learned Senior Government Pleader would point out the provision contained in Rule 135 of Part III KSR, which deals with lapses and forfeiture. As per Rule 135, as it stood prior to its substitution by SRO No.1395/2023, with effect from 28.12.2023, if a pension remains undrawn for more than three years, the pension ceases to be payable. As per Rule 135, after its substitution by SRO No.1395//2023, if a pension/family pension/compassionate allowance remains undrawn for more than three years, the pension/family pension/compassionate allowance ceases to be payable. 6. As per Rule 136 of Part III KSR, prior to its substitution by SRO No.1395/2023, with effect from 28.12.2023, if the pensioner afterwards appears, the Disbursing Officer may reclaim the Pension Payment Order/e-pension payment order and renew his payments. But the arrears cannot be paid (a) without the orders of the Audit Officer and (b) if the pension in arrears is to be paid for the first time or if the amount of arrears exceeds Rs.75,000/- without the previous sanction of the Government to be obtained through the Audit Officer. As per Rule 136, after its substitution by SRO No.1395/2023, if the pensioner afterwards appears, the Disbursing Officer may reclaim the pension payment order and renew his payment, if the period is less than three years. In case were pension remains undrawn for more than three years, both halves of pension payment order are to be forwarded to the Accountant General for validation. In case were pension remains undrawn for more than three years, both halves of pension payment order are to be forwarded to the Accountant General for validation. The amount of arrears cannot be paid, without the previous sanction of the Government, if such amount exceeds Rs.3,00,000/-. As per Note 1, the term pension includes pension, family pension and compassionate allowance. As per Note 2, the request for arrears along with arrear statement shall be forwarded to Finance Department by the Disbursing Officer for sanction. 7. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the respondents-petitioners would rely on Ext.P3 certificate dated nil issued from Jubilee Memorial Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, in order to show that the pensioner had suffered Troponin I +ve Acute Coronary Syndrome on 24.03.2015 and thereafter she was on continued medication. We notice that Ext.P3 certificate does not bear any date, the name of the doctor who issued it and the seal of the hospital. 8. The learned Senior Government Pleader would point out the direction contained in Ext.P17 communication dated 03.03.2024 issued by the 4 th appellant Treasury Director. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of that communication read thus: 9. The learned counsel for the respondents-petitioners would submit that pursuant to the direction contained in Ext.P17 communication dated 03.03.2024 of the 4 th respondent Director of Treasuries (4 th appellant herein), the 1 st respondent herein, who is one among the legal heirs of the deceased pensioner, submitted Ext.P18 representation dated 04.04.2024 before the 4 th appellant Treasury Director. 10. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and also the submissions made at the Bar, we find that, the case of the respondents-petitioners that the pensioner had suffered Troponin I +ve Acute Coronary Syndrome on 24.03.2015 and thereafter she was on continued medication is not substantiated by producing any reliable materials. Ext.P3 certificate dated nil issued from Jubilee Memorial Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, does not bear any date, the name of the doctor who issued it and the seal of the hospital. In the absence of any reliable materials, the learned Single Judge went wrong in concluding that after the last mustering done on 30.12.2016, the pensioner, who died on 20.07.2021 was prevented from mustering due to the floods in the year 2018 and 2019 and also due to Covid-19 pandemic. In the absence of any reliable materials, the learned Single Judge went wrong in concluding that after the last mustering done on 30.12.2016, the pensioner, who died on 20.07.2021 was prevented from mustering due to the floods in the year 2018 and 2019 and also due to Covid-19 pandemic. The provisions contained in Rules 135 and 136 of Part III KSR were also not taken note of by the learned Single Judge while rendering the impugned judgment dated 20.02.2025 in W.P.(C)No.30675 of 2024. In such circumstances, this writ appeal is disposed of by setting aside the judgment dated 20.02.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.30675 of 2024 and by directing the 2nd appellant Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Finance Department, to consider the claim made by the respondents-petitioners for the balance pension payable to the deceased pensioner for the period from May 2019 to July 2021, in accordance with the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore, after reckoning 2014 and 2019 pension revision orders. The respondents-petitioners shall produce before the 2nd appellant reliable materials, including medical records, if any, to show that the pensioner had suffered Troponin I +ve Acute Coronary Syndrome on 24.03.2015 and thereafter she was on continued medication. Such materials shall be produced before the 2nd appellant, within a period of one month, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter, the 2nd appellant shall consider the claim of the respondents-petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a further period of two months, after affording them an opportunity of being heard.