Gijo George v. Superintendent of Police
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners challenged denial of salary arrears due to lack of pay protection after transfer. The Court held that in mandamus cases involving salary, the petitioner must first approach the competent authority for redressal. Consequently, the petition was disposed of without granting relief.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
FRIDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2007 / 22ND ASHADHA 1929
WP(C).No. 5946 of 2004(G)
------------------------------------
PETITIONERS:
------------------
1. GIJO GEORGE, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. O.T.GEORGE, OLAKKENGAL HOUSE, KOTTEKAD, KUTTUR P.O., THRISSUR. (VILLAGE MAN, TALUK OFFICE, TALAPPILLY TALUK)
2. BIJURAJ M.M., AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN, MUTHIRAPARAMBATH HOUSE, PATTAMBI ROAD, THRISSUR. (L.D.CLERK , ANIMAL HUSBANDARY DEPARTMENT)
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing payment of arrears of salary denied due to refusal of pay protection upon transfer and appointment.
Whether the petitioner has approached the competent authority before seeking judicial intervention for salary arrears.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
GIJO GEORGE
- petitioner
BIJURAJ M.M.
- respondent
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR
- respondent
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR
- respondent
COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court