V.N. Ramakrishna Pillai vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Ashok Bhushan, Actg. C.J.

These two review petitions have been filed praying for review of judgment dated 21.12.2010 in writ appeal No. 440 of 2010 and writ appeal No. 459 of 2010 respectively. The issue in the writ petition, which was filed by the Board/appellant was as to the date of implementation of revised pension as the State Government had issued Government Order revising the pensionary benefit in the year 2006. The State Government has provided that the revised pensionary benefit shall be available with effect from 1.4.2005. The respondent took the matter before the Lokayukta, who directed for extending the benefit with effect from 1.4.2005. The Board filed writ petition challenging the said order, which was dismissed by learned Single Judge, against which order an appeal was filed, which appeal was disposed of. The Division Bench held that the Board being the statutory body was entitled to adopt the scheme with effect from such date as it deemed fit and proper. The Division Bench also held that the Board having taken a decision on 7.8.2006 to adopt the State Government''s revised scheme, it shall be the date from which the respondents were entitled for the benefit of revised pension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the review petition submits that the Board has admitted in its counter affidavit filed before the Lokayukta that the Board is implementing the revision with effect from 1.4.2005. He submits that in fact the respondents received the benefit of revised pension. He submits that after the decision, certain information was received under the Right to Information Act whereby it has been informed that the revision was made from 1.4.2005 and hence the judgment should be reviewed.

We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The issue in the appeal, which has been decided by the appellate Bench was that the date from which the revised benefit shall be implemented against the respondent. After considering all the materials the Division Bench held that the benefit shall be implemented with effect from 7.8.2006. By this review petition, we cannot permit the petitioner to raise the same issue regarding the date from which implementation to be made. In so far as the information is obtained under the Right to Information Act, the said information which has been brought along with the review petition does not indicate that revised benefit shall be extended with effect from 1.4.2005. The information only says that the arrears have been paid based on the corresponding scales of pay of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.2005. Be that as it may, the grounds which have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the review petition do not make out any valid ground for review of the judgment.

The Review Petitions are dismissed.