K.K. NARAYANAN NAIR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who retired from service of the 2nd respondent Bank, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 Government order dated 20.03.2007 and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to sanction and disburse the arrears of monetary benefits accrued for the period from 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003 to the petitioners consequent on the pay revision of employees in Co-operative Societies in the State of Kerala based on the pay revision order dated 21.06.2005 bearing No.G.O.(MS) No.145/2005/Co-op. issued by the 1st respondent with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 01.07.2002 till disbursement and for other consequential reliefs.

(2.) The issue raised in this writ petition as to the entitlement of the petitioners for arrears of salary for the period from 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003 has now been settled by the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 25.05.2018 in W.A.No.1222 of 2017 and connected cases. Paragraphs 19, 20 and the operative portion of the said judgment reads thus :

(3.) In the judgment dated 25.05.2018 in W.A.No.1222 of 2017 and connected cases the Division Bench held that as the dispute is about denial of arrears of salary and allowances, which stood revised with effect from 1.7.2002, for a period of 12 months commencing from 1.7.2002 and ending with 30.6.2003 and as the petitioners had moved this court within three months after W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 was allowed by a learned single Judge of this court, there is no reason or justification to deny relief to the petitioners on the ground that there was delay and laches and acquiescence on their part. It is also held that if the claim made by the petitioners is granted it would not affect the settled rights of third parties. It will also not result in the reopening of issues already concluded. It would not also affect the seniority of employees in service or their promotions. In the light of those facts, the Court find no reason or justification to deny relief to the petitioners on the ground of delay and laches. However, as the petitioners in W.P.(C)Nos.7146, 11337, 11344, 20741, 22430, 26955 and 27455 of 2017 moved this court only after W.P.(C)No.34683 of 2009 was heard and allowed, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh (supra), they are not entitled to interest. The Division Bench held that the petitioners in those writ petitions are entitled for arrears of salary during the period from 01.07.2002 to 30.06.2003. However, they shall not be entitled for payment of interest for the aforesaid arrears.