Allowed

G.Surendran Pillai v. the Union of India

Kerala HC30 Oct 2012WP(C)/18374/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired government employees challenged disparity in pay and pension compared to diploma holders. The Court directed fixation of pay scale from 1996 and disbursement of arrears for salary and pension, as relief was granted to similarly situated employees in other courts.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to refix pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and disburse salary and pension arrears within three months.

G.Surendran Pillai Vs the Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/8TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 18374 of 2012 (V)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1. G.SURENDRAN PILLAI, AGED 60 YEARS

¶8

EX-GS-120728-K-SUPDT, BR-II RESIDING AT MARATHOLIL HOUSE, CHERUTHANA P.O. KARUVATTA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 517.

¶9

2. M.J.JOSEPH

¶10

EX-GS-156205-W, OVERSEER, RESIDING AT MECHERIL HOUSE KARICHAL P.O., PAYIPPAD

¶11

ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 514.

¶12

3. CHANDRASEKHARAN V.

¶13

EX-GS-154483-L, SUPDT BR-II RESIDING AT KOTTATHARAYIL HOUSE, CHINGOLI P.O. ALAPPUZHA-690 532.

¶14

4. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR M.T. EXGS-158974-Y, SUPDT-BR-II RESIDING AT ANUGRAHA HOUSE, MUNDAPPUZHA, RANNI P.O. PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 672.

¶15

5. VIJAYACHANDRAN T.V. EXGS-157738-L, SUPDT BR-II RESIDING AT VIJAYASADANAM HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR P.O. EXHUMATTOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 586.

¶16

6. R.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR

¶17

EXGS-154062-H, SUPDT BR-II RESIDING AT RAMAMANGALATHU HOUSE, PUTHIYAVILA P.O. PATTOLIMARKET, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 531.

¶18

7. V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶19

EXGS-14797-F, SUPDT BR-II RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE MATTOM SOUTH P.O., THATTARAMBALAM, MAVELIKKARA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 103.

¶20

8. B.VIJAYASENAN

¶21

EXGS-159465-M, OVERSEER, RESIDING AT PREETHIS AKAMKUDY P.O., NAGIARKULANGARA, ALAPPUZHA-690 513.

¶22

BY ADVS.SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI

¶23

R. SREEDHARAN NAIR SMT.SABINA JAYAN

¶24

RESPONDENTS:

¶25

1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, B - WING

¶26

4TH FLOOR, SENA BHAVAN NEW DELHI-11.

¶27

2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF BORDER ROAD,

¶28

SEMA SADAK BHAVAN, RING ROAD DELHI CANTT, NEW DELHI- 10.

¶29

3. THE PAO GREF

¶30

ADMN. BLOCK, C/O.GREF CENTRE, DIGHI CAMP

¶31

PUNE-15.

¶32

R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

WP(C).No. 18374 of 2012

¶35

APPENDIX

¶36

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶37

EXHIBIT P1.	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4/10/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2.	TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER OF EXT.P1 DATED 29/12/2012.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.18368/6TH CPC(REP)DGBR/17/T&C DATED 3/12/2010 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4.	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 60950/SPK/DGBR/69/G CELL DATED 17/4/2012 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE

kvr/

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶42

¶43

W.P. (C) No. 18374 of 2012

¶44

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

The petitioners, who were working as

¶47

Overseer/Superintendent BR II and retired from the service are constrained to approach this Court because of the disparity in the amounts which were being paid to the petitioner by way of 'salary' and also because of difference in 'pension' liable to be paid in the relevant scale.

¶48

According to the petitioners, they seek for fixation of pay scale of 5000 - 8000 w.e.f 01.01.1996 and thereafter to put in the pay band of PB II of Rs. 8700 - 34800 along with the grade pay of Rs. 4200/- and to recompute the pension and to disburse the arrears at the earliest.

¶49

The grievance relates to the difference in qualification and the quota prescribed for promotion to be given to the Diploma holders and Degree holders. Admittedly, the petitioners were not even having the Diploma and hence they

¶50

W.P.(C) No. 18374 of 2012 : 2 :

¶51

were denied the benefit of promotion to the concerned posts by the Departmental Promotion Committee in respect of the 'quota' earmarked for the Diploma holders. Challenging the disparity in the pay packet between the junior promotee Diploma holders and senior non-diploma holders, some of the serving and retired employees approached the Gauhati High Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 51 of 2009, which was allowed and the respondents therein were directed to revise the pay scale of the petitioners therein (similarly situated as the petitioners herein) at 5000 - 8000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Though a writ appeal was preferred therefrom, it did not turn to be fruitful

¶52

and the same was dismissed as per judgment dated 18.03.2011 (in W.A. No. 19 of 2010). The Revenue took up the matter further by approaching the Apex Court by filing SLP, wherein also interference was declined and the SLP was dismissed as per order dated 01.11.2011. The petitioners contend that pursuant to the verdicts as aforesaid, the Department finally decided to implement the said pay scale,

¶53

W.P.(C) No. 18374 of 2012

¶54

: 3 :

¶55

by passing consequential order dated 17.04.2012; a copy of which has been produced and marked as Ext. P4. Petitioners seek for similar relief.

¶56

Heard the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶57

No counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the respondents and there is no dispute with regard to the sequence of events. This Court finds that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the judgments as aforesaid, more so, when the SLP preferred against the verdict passed by the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in W.A. No. 19 of

¶58

2010 has been dismissed, leading to Ext. P4 order.

¶59

In the above circumstances, the petitioners herein, who are stated as similarly situated as that of the petitioners referred to in the above judgments, are entitled to have similar relief. It is ordered accordingly. Respondents are directed to refix the pay of the petitioners in the relevant scale w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and the arrears of salary as well as arrears

¶60

W.P.(C) No. 18374 of 2012

¶61

: 4 :

¶62

of pension shall be disbursed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a

¶63

copy of this judgment.

¶64

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶65

sd/-

¶66

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶67

kmd

G.Surendran Pillai v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Surendran Pillai v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Benny M.John Vs State of Kerala

Sreenivasan S. Vs the Manager, Aided Upper Primary School, Tripannur

A.Ramanakumar Vs Kerala Agro Industries Corportion Ltd.

T.B.Anilkumar Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Syamkumar P Vs the State of Kerala

P.P.Narayanan Vs University of Calicut