Kerala High Court
Satheeshkumar.K.K vs State Of Kerala on 6 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 377 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
SATHEESHKUMAR K.K.
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O THE LATE P.R.KUTTAPPAN NAIR, AGED 56 YEARS, HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER (SELECTION GRADE) HISTORY
(RETIRED), SMV NSS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL., KALLARA
P.O., KOTTAYAM-680 583. RESIDING AT KONNANKEL HOUSE,
NADVATHNAGAR P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688526
BY ADVS. O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN (SR.)
H.VISHNUDAS
GEORGE VARGHESE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANATHPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM., PIN - 695014
3 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND PENSION SANCTIONING
AUTHORITY,OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTORATE,
THIRUNAKKARA SOUTH ROAD, THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN -
686001
4 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTORATE, HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION, EDUCATION COMPLEX, NEAR MINI CIVIL
STATION, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 689121
5 GENERAL MANAGER & INSPECTOR OF NSS SCHOOLS
PERUNNA, CHANGANACHERY, PIN - 686102
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 2
BY ADVS.
R1 TO R4 BY SRI. PREMCHAND R. NAIR, GOVT.PLEADER
R5 BY SRI. V.VIJULAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.02.2025, THE COURT ON 06.03.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 3
JUDGMENT
This writ petition was submitted by the petitioner, who
retired from service on superannuation, while working as a
Higher Secondary School Teacher (Senior Selection Grade)
from SMV NSS Higher Secondary School, Kallara on 31.05.2023.
The grievance highlighted by the petitioner is regarding the
non-disbursement of retirement benefits. The relief sought in
this writ petition are as follows:
i) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction
or order directing the respondents to sanction and disburse
pension and other retirement benefits payable to the petitioner
in accordance with Rule 1 of Chapter XXVII-B of the Kerala
Education Rules admissible on his retirement attaining the age of
superannuation on 31.05.2023 with penal interest at the rate of
15% on the amounts payable to the petitioner from the date the
pension and other retiral benefits became due to the date of
actual payment forthwith.
ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction
or order directing the respondents to pay a compensation for the
loss and damage suffered by the petitioner and his family by
reason of non-payment of pension and retirement benefits under
the Rules immediately on his retirement on 31.5.2023 in time at
the lowest estimate at Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) with interest
expeditiously and at any rate, within a time frame that may be
fixed by this Hon’ble Court;
iii) To issue such other appropriate writ, direction or order which this
Hon’ble Court deems just and fit in the circumstances of the
case, and
iv) To award exemplary costs to the petitioner.
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 4
2. During the pendency of the writ petition, an interim
order was passed by this Court on 23.02.2024 directing the
respondents to disburse the entire pensionary benefits due to
the petitioner within two weeks. Accordingly, the pensionary
benefits were granted to the petitioner on 13.03.2024 and
14.3.2024. Now, what remains in this writ petition is the claim of
interest for the belated payment and pension, and for
compensation for the loss suffered by the petitioner and his
family for non-payment of pension in time. The facts which
are necessary for resolving the dispute involved in this case
are as follows:
The petitioner was initially appointed as Higher
Secondary School Teacher (History) in the NSS Higher
Secondary School, Koottar. Thereafter, on completion of 8
years of service he was placed in HSST (Senior Selection
Grade)with effect from 6.8.2011. While so, the petitioner was
suspended from service under Rule 67 Chapter XIVA of the
2025:KER:17966WP(C)NO.377/2024 5
Kerala Education Rules as he was implicated as an accused
in Crime No. 1116/2016 of Poochakkal Police Station for the
offences under Sections 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code
and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act. Later, the
suspension was revoked and the petitioner was reinstated in
service on 19.06.2017 and thus the petitioner was kept under
suspension during the period from 1.11.2016 to 18.6.2017.
3. Later, in the trial conducted, the petitioner was
found to be not guilty and accordingly he was acquitted as
per Ext.P5 judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions
Judge-1 Alappuzha. As a consequence of the same, the
period of suspension from 1.11.2016 to 18.6.2017 was
regularized on 07.06.22 as admissible duty as per Ext.P6 order.
Later, as the petitioner was due to retire on 31.5.2023, the
petitioner submitted Ext.P9 application for pension with
requisite documents before the 3rd respondent on 28.03.2023.
However, the 4th respondent-Regional Deputy Director (RDD),
Chengannur, requested the 3rd respondent to forward the
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 6
service book of the petitioner to his office, stating that the
General Education Department, at Secretariat had instructed
to get the service book of the petitioner for verification, and
accordingly, the same was forwarded to the 4 th respondent.
On account of the same, the pension could not be processed
and therefore acting upon the representation submitted by
the petitioner, the Principal of SMV NSS Higher Secondary
School, Kallara requested the 4th respondent to return the
service book of the petitioner for processing the pension
papers. Since the same was not acted upon, a further
representation was submitted by the petitioner before the 2 nd
respondent.
4. According to the petitioner, by virtue of the
provisions contained in Chapter XIV(C)and XVII-B of the
Kerala Education Rules, the aided school teachers are
governed by the rules on retirement benefits including the
family pension and death-cum-retirement benefits, as
applicable to Government Servants as laid down in Part III
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 7
Kerala Service Rules. It was averred that as per Ext.P14
Circular dated 30.11.1999, the Government stipulated that, in
all cases, pensionary benefits have to be invariably
sanctioned within 60 days of retirement. However, in the case
of the petitioner, despite repeated reminders, the pensionary
benefits of the petitioner were not granted. It is also the case
of the petitioner that in the meantime, the son of the
petitioner viz. Adithyan S. secured 98.25% marks in Higher
Secondary Examination conducted in March, 2023. He
secured an admission to B.Tech course in the Amrita Institute
of Engineering as evidenced by Ext.P17. The petitioner’s son
was assigned rank No.16572 under the branch, Computer
Science and Engineering (CSE) and the fees fixed for the year
2023-2024 was Rupees six lakhs in Coimbatore Campus for the
said course. However, as the petitioner was deprived of the
pension commutation of 17,36,928/- and Gratuity amount of
Rs.10,46,460/- the petitioner could not raise sufficient funds for
remitting fees for his son’s education and thus his son was
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 8
deprived of the opportunity to join the said course. Therefore,
seeking a direction to the respondent to disburse the
pensionary benefits with penal interest at the rate of 15% on
the amount payable to the petitioner and also seeking
compensation of Rs.10 lakhs with interest for the loss and
damage sustained by the petitioner and his family due to the
non-payment of pension in time, this Writ Petition is submitted.
5. A counter affidavit is submitted by the 2 nd
respondent wherein, it is averred that, during the surprise
enquiry conducted by the Government at the office of the
Regional Deputy Director(RDD), Chengannur on 20.05.2023,
24.5.2023 and 25.5.2023 many irregularities were found. One
of the major irregularities found was the forgery of certain
orders related to the regularization of suspension period of the
petitioner. Consequent to this, the inspection team seized the
service book of the petitioner for further verification and the
service book was taken by the government. In the meantime,
the Principal of the institution made a request to Regional
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 9
Deputy Director (RDD), Kottayam to return the service book of
the petitioner and the RDD, Kottayam returned the service
book of the petitioner to the Principal concerned on
26.5.2023. Thereafter, the said service book was submitted by
the Principal before the RDD, Chengannur for the purpose of
inspection made by the General Education Department of
Kerala on 26.5.2023. Later as decided by the Government, a
detailed inquiry was conducted by appointing
Sri.M.M.Muhammed Haneefa, Joint Secretary, General
Education Department as an inquiry officer. As part of the
above inquiry, the service book of the petitioner was made
available for inspection before the Government and
thereafter returned to RDD, Chengannur on 13.2.2024 after
completing the inquiry. Thereafter, on 19.2.2024, the Principal
received the service book from RDD,Chengannur and
pension proposals were proceeded through PRISM by providing
the connected documents on 20.2.2024 to the office of the
Accountant General through a special messenger from
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 10
RDD,Kottayam. It is further averred that, the pensionary
benefits will be released as and when the Accountant
General sanctions pension payment order and DCRG.
6. It was after filing the above counter affidavit and
perusing the same, an interim order was passed by this Court
on 23.02.2024 directing to release the pensionary benefits to
the petitioner within two weeks, consequent to which
pensionary benefits were received by the petitioner on
13.3.2024 and 14.3.2024.
7. Heard Sri. O.V.Radhakrishnan, the learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Premchand R.
Nair, the learned Government Pleader appearing for
respondents 1 to 4 and Sri. Vijulal, the learned counsel
appearing for the 5th respondent.
8. Since the amounts payable to the petitioner towards
pensionary benefits were already released, what remains in
this writ petition are the prayers relating to the interest for the
delay in payment and also the claim of compensation for the
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 11
loss and damage sustained to the petitioner due to the delay.
In relation to the claim of interest, learned Senior Counsel
places reliance upon a series of judgments rendered by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein it was categorically held that,
pension is a right and not a bounty or gratuitous payment.
Therefore, as there was delay in disbursing the pension without
any valid reason, the petitioner is entitled for interest. Reliance
was placed on Exts.P14, P15, P25 and P26 Circulars.
9. In Dr.Uma Agarwal v. State of U.P. and Another,
(1999)3 SCC 438, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court that, the Government is obliged to initiate process for
payment according to time-schedule prescribed in the
Departmental Rules and non-observance of the time-schedule
is one of the factors which court may take into account while
considering employee’s request for interest on delayed
payment. In that case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted
Rs.1 lakh towards cost payable to the petitioner therein.
10. In Poonamal(smt) and Others v. Union of India and
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 12
Others,(1985)3 SCC 345, it was observed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court that, pension is not merely a statutory right but
is the fulfilment of a Constitutional promise in as much as it
partakes the character of public assistance in case of
unemployment, old-age, disablement or similar other cases of
underserved want. It was further observed that the payment
of pension does not depend upon the discretion of the
Government, and that is governed by the relevant rules and
anyone entitled to the pension under the rules can claim it as
a matter of right.
11. In Khem Chand v. Union of India and Others , AIR
1963 SC 687, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the right to
arrears of pay and allowances constituted the ‘property’
within the meaning of Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution. By
placing reliance upon the same, the learned Senior Counsel
contended that, in as much as there is no justifiable reason for
causing delay in releasing the pensionary benefits, the
petitioner is entitled to get interest.
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 13
12. While considering the said contention, it is also
to be noted that, the necessity to release pension without any
delay is a duty cast upon the Government as evidenced by
Exts.P25 and P26 Circulars issued in this regard. It is to be noted
that, the said Circulars were issued in the light of the directions
and observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while
dealing with the delay in releasing the pensionary benefits.
Ext.P25 was issued by taking note of the observations made
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C)No.9425/84 to the
effect that the liability to pay penal interest on these dues
should commence at the expiry of two months from the date
of retirement. The Government has issued instructions to all
pension sanctioning authorities and Heads of Departments to
strictly follow the instructions so far issued and to settle the
pensionary claims without delay. The documents necessary
for sanctioning pension and gratuity should be prepared
sufficiently early so that payment of gratuity amount could be
made to the government servant on the date he retires or on
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 14
the following day. Penal consequences upon officers who
commits default in fulfilling the said obligation are also
contemplated in Ext.P26. Thus, on going through the
observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred
to above which were intended to be given effect to as per
the various government circulars referred to above, it is
evident that, necessity to release pension without any delay,
to the government servant is absolute, as the right to receive
pension forms part of the ‘property’ of such government
servant which comes under his Constitutional right under Art.
300A of Constitution of India. Therefore, when there occurs
delay, necessarily he must be given interest for such delay in
case there are no justifiable reasons which can be attributed
to the petitioner/government servant in sanctioning the
pension.
13. As far as this case is concerned, even though the
petitioner retired on 31.05.2023, he was granted pensionary
benefits only on 13.3.2024 and 14.3.2024 that too only when
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 15
this Court interfered in the matter by issuing an interim order
on 23.2.2024. Thus, there is a delay in disbursing the pensionary
benefits, despite the fact that, it is evident from Ext.P14 that
the pension has to be released within the outer limit of 60 days
from the date of retirement by the government servant.
14. Having found that the interest is to be granted for
the delay, it incidentally leads to the next question as to
whether there is any default from the part of the petitioner in
causing delay or as to whether any of his acts contributed to
the delay in processing pension papers. For considering the
said question, the averments made in the counter affidavit of
the 2nd respondent are relevant. The only explanation put
forward is that an inquiry was conducted as to the manner in
which the period of suspension from 1.11.2016 to 18.6.2017
was regularized, as according to them, some forged
documents were used for the said purpose. However, even
though an inquiry as referred to above was claimed to have
been conducted by appointing an officer in this regard, the
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 16
counter affidavit is conspicuously silent with regard to the
outcome of the such inquiry, the scope of the same and the
other matters in connection with the same. Since nothing is
mentioned in the counter affidavit as to any contumacious
act on the part of the petitioner, it can only be inferred that in
the inquiry so conducted, nothing has come out incriminating
the petitioner. This is particularly because, no further
proceedings were suggested against the petitioner and in the
counter affidavit itself they have stated that the pensionary
benefits can be released to the petitioner on getting the
approval of the Accountant General. Thus, it is evident that,
despite conducting an inquiry, no finding could be entered
into against the petitioner. Apart from the above, it is evident
from the contents of the counter affidavit that the decision to
conduct inquiry was taken on the basis of the information
they could collect in a surprise enquiry conducted in the
office of the Regional Deputy Director on 20.5.2023, 24.5.2023
and 24.5.2023. However, the said inquiry could be
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 17
completed only on 20.02.2024 and there are no averments in
the counter affidavit to the effect that the petitioner had
contributed to the delay in completing the inquiry or there
were any other causes attributable to the petitioner in
causing such delay. Therefore, as there are no reasons
attributable to the petitioner which resulted in the delay in
processing the pension papers, the petitioner is entitled to a
reasonable interest for the delayed payment from the expiry
of two months from the date of his retirement.
15. The next relief sought by the petitioner pertains to the
compensation for the damages which he claimed to have
been sustained owing to the delay in disbursal of the
retirement benefits. The said relief is sought mainly on the
reason that, as there occurred the delay in disbursing the
retirement benefits, the son of the petitioner, who secured
admission for Engineering Degree course in Amrita Institute of
Engineering, could not join the course. The learned Senior
Counsel placed a large number of decisions in support of the
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 18
claim of the petitioner to get the compensation. In Rustom
Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of India (AIR 1970 SC 564), the
observations made by 11 judges benches was also relied on
wherein it was observed that;
“92-A. In its dictionary meaning “compensation” means
anything given to make things equal in value: anything given as
an equivalent, to make amends for loss or damage. In all States
where the rule of law prevails, the right to compensation is
guaranteed by the constitution or regarded as inextricably
involved in the right property.”
“122… The Constitution guarantees a right to compensation – an
equivalent in money of the property compulsorily acquired. That
is the basic guarantee. The law must therefore, provide
compensation, and for determine compensation relevant
principles must be specified; if the principles are not relevant the
ultimate value determined is not compensation”
“123. … The Constitution guarantees that the expropriated
owner must be given the value of his property, i.e.,what may be
regarded reasonably as compensation for loss of the property
and that such compensation should not be illusory and not
reached by the application of irrelevant principles….”
16. In Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City v. E.D.
Sheppard reported in AIR 1963 SC 1343, a four judge bench of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that;
“8. ….As Romer, L.J. Said in Henry v. Foster (1932) 16 Tax Cas 605
at p. 634 compensation for loss of office or employment is a
well-known term; it means a payment to the holder of an office
as compensation for being deprived of profits to which as
between himself and his employer he would, but for an act of
deprivation by his employer or some third party such as the
Legislature, have been entitled. It should be obvious that when
the deprivation is by the Legislature, there can be no question of
liability or compellability to pay damages at law. The emphasis is
2025:KER:17966WP(C)NO.377/2024 19
on the act of deprivation – which may or may not give rise to
liability at law…..”
17. However, even though the petitioner may be entitled
for compensation, the question that arises here is whether the
reasons which are highlighted in this writ petition, as the cause
of action for claiming compensation for the loss of damages,
can be considered in a writ proceeding. As mentioned
above, the loss and damage are claimed to have been
sustained by the petitioner as his son could not secure his
admission in an Engineering college due to non-payment of
fees in time, which, in turn, was due to lack of availability of
the funds as the petitioner did not receive pensionary benefits
in time. The crucial aspect to be noticed is that, those are
questions of fact which have to be proved and established
by the petitioner by adducing evidence. To be precise, the
questions as to whether the petitioner’s son failed to secure
admission, whether the failure to secure admission was
directly related to the non payment of fees, whether the
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 20
non payment of fees was owing to the non release of the
pensionary benefits etc., are the matters to be proved by the
petitioner. Such proof can be examined only by a competent
civil court and such exercise is not at all contemplated in a
proceeding under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. Besides,
the extent of damage sustained to the petitioner on account
of the delay in disbursing the pensionary benefits, so far as it
relates to the denial of admission of the petitioner’s son to an
educational institution, is also a matter which can be
determined only after taking evidence. Therefore, I do not
find that the relief sought by the petitioner for compensation
for loss and damage sustained to him on account of the
above, can be adjudicated in this proceedings.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of
directing respondents 1 to 4 to grant interest to the petitioner
for the belated payment of pension at the rate of 6% per
annum for the period from 31.7.2023 onwards (the date after
expiry of two months from the date of retirement) till 13.3.2024
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 21
and 14.3.2024 in respect of the respective payments
received. The said amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner
within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the
judgment. As far as the relief sought by the petitioner for
damages are concerned, it is for the petitioner to claim the
same by approaching a competent civil court and the said
relief is therefore declined without prejudice to the right of the
petitioner to initiate such proceedings.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
pkk
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 22
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 377/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED
05-08-2003 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT-GENERAL
MANAGER & INSPECTOR.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
ACD.A5/7416/HSE/02 DATED 14-04-2004 OF THE
DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DATA SHEET OF THE
PETITIONER RETRIEVED FROM THE SERVICE AND
PAYROLL ADMINISTRATIVE REPOSITORY FOR
KERALA (SPARK)
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1/9418/2016
DATED 14-06-2017 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 28-03-
2022 IN SESSIONS CASE NO. 708/2017 OF THE
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-I,
ALAPPUZHA.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1/9418/2016
DATED 07-06-2022 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.5265/C9/2022/RDD/CNGR DATED 05-09-2022
OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER B1/1679/2022 DATED
27-05-2022 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION APPLICATION WITH
THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS ALONG WITH THE
COVERING LETTER DATED 28-03-2023 SUBMITTED
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 26-05-2023
ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OFFICE OF
THE 4TH RESPONDENT
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 23
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18-
07-2023 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE
PRINCIPAL, SMV NSS, KALLARA
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19-07-2023
ADDRESSED TO THE PRINCIPAL OF SMV NSS,
HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KALLARA
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02-
12-2023 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P13(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.1908 DATED 12-
12-2023-KOTTAYAM COLLECTORATE.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.73/99/FIN.
DATED 30TH NOVEMBER, 1999 OF THE FINANCE
(PENSION-C) DEPARTMENT
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.22/2014/FIN.
DATED 11-03-2014
Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE
BOARD OF HIGHER SECONDARY EXAMINATIONS,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE ADMIT CARD, AMRITA
ENTRANCE EXAMINATION ENGINEERING 2023
Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE AMRITA ENGINEERING
EXAMINATION 2023-RANK NO. 16572 AMRITA
ONLINE ADMISSION PORTAL
Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF THE AMRITA FEES STRUCTURE
2023 FOR B.TECH COMPUTER SCIENCE FOR THE
YEAR 2023-2024 RETRIEVED FROM THE OFFICIAL
WEB-SITE OF AMRITA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
EXHIBIT P-20 VERIFICATION REPORT DATED 04-03-2024
EXHIBIT P-21 PENSION PAYMENT ORDER DATED 29-02-2024
RETRIEVED FROM OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF PRISM
EXHIBIT P-22 COMMUTATION PAYMENT ORDER DATED 29-02-2024
RETRIEVED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF
2025:KER:17966
WP(C)NO.377/2024 24
PRISM
EXHIBIT P-23 GRATUITY PAYMENT ORDER DATED 29-02-2024
RETRIEVED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSIRE OF
PRISM
EXHIBIT P-24 LETTER DATED -3-2024 OF THE PETITIONER TO
THE PRINCIPAL, SMV NSS HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, KALLARA
EXHIBIT P-25 CIRCULAR NO. 31/85/FIN. DATED 10-04-1985
EXHIBIT P-26 CIRCULAR NO. 78/87/FIN. DATED 29-09-1987
