(1.) Introduction: An employee, on his superannuation, claims his terminal benefits. He demands that, to reckon the length of his service, his previous service in some other establishment should be counted. That claim rejected, he complained to the Lok Ayukta. And it issued an interim mandatory injunction or direction. The former employer questions, in this writ petition, the Lok Ayukta's jurisdiction or power to issue interim mandatory injunctions.
(2.) So the question is, does Lok Ayukta have the inherent jurisdiction to issue interim directions-mandatory ones, at that-despite its ultimate power being only advisory? Facts:
(3.) First-respondent Jayakumar served the Printing Department and retired. Before his joining the Printing Department, he had also worked in the Kerala State Institute of Languages (KSIL). When his employer wanted to fix the terminal benefits, Jayakumar insisted that his service in KSIL should also be considered. So demanding, he applied to his first employer:KSIL. After failing to receive a positive response from the former employer, he approached the learned Lok Ayukta, by filing the Ext.P1 complaint; he sought these reliefs: