The court dismissed a writ petition challenging the reduction of the petitioner's pay due to irregularities found in audit regarding pay fixation. The court upheld Rule 37(b) of Part I KSR, stating the government's recruitment policy is not subject to judicial substitution, and denied the claim for protecting prior service pay.
none
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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/15TH POUSHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 27485 of 2008 (V)
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
PRAKASAN K.E., S/O.VIJAYAN, "DHANYA VIHAR", P.O. PINARAYI, KANNUR, WORKING AS LD CLERK, JUVENILE COURT THALASSERY.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SMT.S.AMINA.
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, (PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE) THALASSERY.
3. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E)
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.V.LONACHAN.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rvs.
WP(C).No. 27485 of 2008 (V)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
-----------------------
| EXHIBIT | P1- | TRUE COPY OF THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, |
PAY FIXATION PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, KANNUR. |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT | P2- | TRUE COPY OF THE | FORM OF OPTION. |
| EXHIBIT | P3- | TRUE COPY OF THE OF POLICE, KANNUR |
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SUPERINTENDENT . |
| EXHIBIT | P3(A)- | TRUE COPY OF THE | RELIEVING ORDER. |
| EXHIBIT | P4- | TRUE COPY OF RESPONDENT. |
THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND |
| EXHIBIT | P5- | TRUE COPY OF THE THE REVISED PAY S NO.145/2006/FIN. |
STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY IN CALE SANCTIONED AS PER G.O.(P) |
| EXHIBIT | P6- | TRUE COPY OF THE | AUDIT ENQUIRY REPORT. |
| EXHIBIT | P7- | TRUE COPY OF THE | G.O.(P) NO.211/2005/FIN. |
| EXHIBIT | P8- | TRUE COPY OF THE | CIRCULAR NO.23/2006/FIN. |
| EXHIBIT | P9- | TRUE COPY OF TH RESPONDENT. |
E PROCEEDING ISSUED BY THE 3RD |
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
-----------------------
NIL.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
RVS.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
*****************************************************
W.P.(C) No.27485 of 2008
*****************************************************
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner joined the service of the Police
Department as a Police Constable in the year 1990. The petitioner pursuant to the notification issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission for appointment as an L.D.Clerk, was selected and appointed as the L.D. Clerk at the office of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery. The petitioner submits that on completion of 10 years service in the Police Department, he was given non-qualifying higher grade with a pay scale of Rs.3350-5275 and pay was fixed at Rs.3590/-. The petitioner submits that he is entitled for pay that was drawn as a Police Constable and the pay was fixed at Rs.3,800/-. It is further submitted that based on the pay revision of 2006, the petitioner's pay was re-fixed at
W.P.(C) No.27485 of 2008 2
Rs.7,000/-. The petitioner also submits that the Regional Audit Wing found that there is irregularity in the matter of fixation of pay for the petitioner as an L.D.Clerk in the criminal judicial service. Based on the audit report, the Chief Judicial Magistrate by Ext.P9 reduced the pay as on 1.2.2006 as Rs.5250/- from Rs.7,000/-. The Audit apparently raised the objection based on the amended Rule 37(b) of Part I KSR. It is challenging the above order and Rule, the writ petition is filed.
“In the case of officiating appointments from a higher time scale of pay to a lower time scale pay by direct recruitment, the officers officiating pay in the lower time scale shall be fixed at the minimum of the scale of pay of the
W.P.(C) No.27485 of 2008 3
new post without considering this pay in higher time scale except in the cases where such appointments are made in accordance with the special rules applicable to such appointment and in the case of such appointments, the officer's officiating pay in the new time scale shall be fixed at his officiating pay in the previous appointment, if it is a stage in the new time scale, or at the next lower stage, if it is not a stage in the new time scale or at the next lower stage, if it is not a stage in the new scale, the difference being treated as personal pay to be absorbed in future increases. But nothing in this sub rule shall apply to cases of reversions.
W.P.(C) No.27485 of 2008 4
accordance with the Special Rules. The petitioner is only eligible for minimum scale of pay. The petitioner is well aware about the implication of new rules. There cannot be any excuse regarding ignorance of a existing rules.
W.P.(C) No.27485 of 2008 5
cannot now command that his pay should be protected. In view of the above, I do not find any justification challenging the vires of the Rules.
Lastly, it is contended that the petitioner may given liberty to approach the Government to amend the Rule. It is open for the petitioner to pursue any remedy before the
Government including for Amendment of Rules.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE
ln
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Rule 37(b) of Part I KSR regarding pay fixation in officiating appointments is valid and in circulation.
Whether the rule is ultra vires and the petitioner's prior service pay should be protected.
Whether the petitioner can challenge the Government's policy on recruitment norms.
PRAKASAN K.E.
STATE OF KERALA
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
