Single judge issued guidelines for the University to reconsider a petitioner's claim for enhanced pay and allowances based on seniority, directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation within one month.
Petitioner directed to submit fresh representation; University to consider and pass orders.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/26TH MAGHA 1934
WP(C).No. 20964 of 2005 (U)
PETITIONERS:
1. O.V. CHELLAMMA, CLERICAL ASSISTANT, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM.
2. T.P.AJIKUMAR, CLERICAL ASSISTANT, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU,
SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN.
RESPONDENT:
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, S.C.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
W.P.(C). NO.20964/2005-U:
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Prv.
B.P.RAY, J
......................................... WP(C)No.20964 of 2005 ......................................... Dated 15th February, 2013
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned senior counsel for M.G.University.
Wpc 20964/2005 2
(2) KLT 871). After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, this court is of the opinion that the action of the University rejecting the claim vide Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. The second petitioner will make a fresh representation highlighting the grievances, along with a copy of this judgment, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the University authorities are directed to consider and pass orders on such representation, in the light of the above decision, within three months thereafter.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
B.P.RAY, JUDGE
lgk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the university's rejection of the petitioner's claim for seniority-based pay and allowances can be sustained in light of this court's earlier prectice.
Whether the university should reconsider the petitioner's grievance representation following this judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madhavan Assan V.SIDCOReferred¶33
(1990 (2) KLT 871)
T.P.Ajikumar
Mahatma Gandhi University
B.P.RAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
B.P.RAY
Parties & counsel
