Writ petition challenging denial of second higher grade in pay scale. Court found facts established in counter-affidavit clarified grievance. Petition closed.
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 SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/23RD ASWINA, 1937
WP(C).No. 2952 of 2009 (B)
PETITIONER:
T.P. AJITHKUMAR, BOAT MASTER, KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI -20.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND
RESPONDENT:
KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-20 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
R,R BY ADV. SRI.V.J.MATHEW,SC,KSINC(KERALA SHIPPING R. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW,SC,KINCO
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RKC
WP(C).No. 2952 of 2009 (B)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
P1: COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S
P2: COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.11.90 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTs
P3: COPY OF SCHEME FOR TIME BOUND HIGHER GRADE PROMOTION IN THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION
P4: COPY OF ORDER DATED 22.4.2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
P5: COPY OF INTIMATION DATED 11.6.08 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE RESPONDENT
P6: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 30.8.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
R1(A): COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A.8/406/96 DT.4.11.96 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
R1(B): COPY OF THE LETTER DT.6.6.08 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT
R1(C): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.22.8.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT
R1(D): COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DT.29.8.08 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
R1(E): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.25.10.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT
R1(F): COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DT.16.12.08 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
RKC
TRUE COPY
PA TO JUDGE
P.V.ASHA, J.
W.P.(C) No.2952 of 2009
Dated this the 15th day of October, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is working as Boatmaster under the respondent, filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P5 and complaining that he was not granted the benefit of 2nd higher grade with effect from 1.12.2006 on completion of 16 years in the cadre of Boat Master.
grade can be granted reckoning his entry post of Lascar only and there is no provision to grant higher grade reckoning promotion
W.P.(C) No.2952 of 2009
:2:
post of Boat Master.
granted reckoning his scale of pay in the promotion post ie. Boat Master, to which post he was promoted as per Ext.P2 with effect from 30.11.1990. But the orders relating to grade promotion are Ext.R1(a) and Ext.P3. It was as per Ext.R1(a) order No.A8/406/96 dated 4.11.1996 that grade promotions were introduced under the respondent. Accordingly employees of the Corporation completing 10 years of continuous service in the same scale of pay were entitled to the next higher scale of pay as provided in the Government order issued on 25.9.1993, referred to therein. Ext.P3 is the subsequent order by which higher grades were sanctioned to the employees of the respondent. As per this, the first higher grade is admissible on completion of 8 years of service in the entry post; 2nd higher grade is admissible on completion of 16 years of service in the entry post/and the first regular promotion post/time bound higher grade taken together and the 3rd higher grade is admissible on completion of 23 years of total service in the entry
:3:
W.P.(C) No.2952 of 2009
post, the first regular promotion post/time bound higher grade and the 2nd regular promotion post/time bound higher grade, taken together. The scale of pay for the entry post with corresponding scale of pay for the 1st , 2nd and 3rd higher grade was also given in this.
W.P.(C) No.2952 of 2009
:4:
accordance with the rules prevailing at the relevant time. The complaint of the petitioner regarding the anomaly of juniors getting higher pay is also answered in paragraph 15 of the
counter affidavit which reads as follows:
15.The allegation in para 5 that the petitioner's juniors both in the cadre of Lascars and Boat Masters (TICM) receive more emoluments than him is factually not correct and mis-leading. Sri. K. Vasu, who joined as a Lascar in 1985 is admittedly senior to the petitioner and got the 3rd higher grade in the year 2008. The petitioner joined duty only in 1986 and is eligible for the 3rd higher grade only on 25/03/2009. Hence, Sri. K. Vasu is drawing higher pay than the petitioner. The petitioner had submitted a representation dtd 22/08/2008 before the respondent pointing out the above alleged difference and the respondent had issued a reply dtd 29/08/2008 clarifying the true facts. The true copy of the representation dtd 22/08/2008 submitted by the petitioner to the respondent is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(C). The true copy of the reply letter dtd 29/08/2008 issued by the respondent to the petitioner is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(D).
W.P.(C) No.2952 of 2009
:5:
In the light of the above circumstances, there cannot be any subsisting grievance for the petitioner and no further orders
are seen required in this Writ Petition. Hence the writ petition is closed.
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
rkc
T.P. Ajithkumar
Kerala Shipping and Inland Navigation Corporation
P.V. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
