Pension Is Employee's Savings, Can Only Be Denied In Cases Of Fraud & Not Due To Pending Litigation Regarding Caste Status: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court directed the disbursal of pensionary benefits to a woman who retired in 2013, stating that she had not committed any fraud even though issues regarding her caste status were pending before the Court.The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen stated that the pension cannot be denied to the petitioner due to the delay on the...
The Kerala High Court directed the disbursal of pensionary benefits to a woman who retired in 2013, stating that she had not committed any fraud even though issues regarding her caste status were pending before the Court.
The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen stated that the pension cannot be denied to the petitioner due to the delay on the part of the State in conducting an inquiry to ascertain whether she belonged to the Moger community or not.
“Pension is a savings of an employee, that can be deprived only in accordance with the procedure established by law or when it is shown that the employment itself has obtained by playing fraud. In the light of the factual situation as above, we cannot hold that any fraud has been committed by the petitioner, though her status as a member of moger community, is set to be retained by this Court.”
The petitioner retired as Junior Superintendent, and ITI was not given pensionary benefits since the State has not conducted an enquiry to identify whether she belonged to the Moger community. The Tribunal dismissed the original application submitted by the petitioner seeking pensionary benefits since issues regarding her case status were not settled and were pending before the Court. Aggrieved by it, the petitioner approached the High Court.
The Court stated that pensionary benefits should be denied only if a patent fraud was committed. In the facts of the case, it stated that the State should have conducted the inquiry to ascertain whether the petitioner belonged to the Moger community or not. The Court stated that the caste status of the petitioner could not be ascertained due to the delay in conducting enquiry by the State.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction to disburse the pensionary benefits to the petitioner.
Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate Kaleeswaram Raj, Thulasi K. Raj, Chinnu Maria Antony
Counsel for Respondents: Advocate Latha T Thankappan
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 209
Case title: Vimalakumari M K v State of Kerala
Case number: OP(KAT) NO. 77 OF 2024