Writ petition challenging denial of monthly incentive and bonus to Mahila Pradhan Agents appointed after 01.04.2007 despite prior agents receiving them. Court dismissed petition as devoid of merits.
Writ petition dismissed.
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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MAY 2016/27TH VAISAKHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 36630 of 2009 (W)
PETITIONER(S):
1. NEETHUSHA SREEJITH, W/O SREEJITH, PULLUKATTU HOUSE, VALAPPU,MALIPPURAM.P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. JINI MOL M.N., MADAPPILLY VEEDU, KIZHAKKUMPURAM, CHENDAMANGALAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
3. GREESHMA SHANMUGHAN, PUTHUVALSTHALATH, PANAMBUKAD, VALLARPADAM.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
4. RADHIKA AJAYAN, ITTIYATHI PARAMBIL, THUNDATHUMKADAVU, VARAPPUZHA.P.O.,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD.
2. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, VYPEEN, KUZHUPPILLY, AYYAMPILLY.P.O., ERNAKULAM.
3. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ALANGAD, ERNAKULAM.
4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
FINANCE (ADMINISTRATION A ) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
5. DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL SAVINGS SCHEME, YWCA BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.36630/2009
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED TO GREESHMA SHANMUGHAN.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
W.P.(C).No. 36630 of 2009
-----------------------------------------------Dated this the 17th day of May, 2016
JUDGMENT
The Central Government had introduced a scheme
called 'Mahila Pradhan Kshetriya Bachat Yojana' to develop saving culture among the public. As per the said scheme, the District Collectors are authorised to engage Mahila Pradhan Agents for collecting deposits. The Mahila Pradhan Agents engaged under the scheme have to work
under the Post Offices. When the scheme was introduced,
as per the orders then in force, the Mahila Pradhan Agents were entitled to 4% commission for the deposits collected by them and 4% monthly incentive as also bonus to be disbursed by the State Government. In due course, the
W.P.(C).No. 36630 of 2009
-2-
State Government imposed a ban on appointment of Mahila
Pradhan Agents. Later as per Ext.P2 order, the ban was lifted on condition that the Mahila Pradhan Agents appointed after 01.04.2007 will not be entitled to the monthly incentive and bonus. Petitioners are persons engaged as Mahila Pradhan Agents after 01.04.2007. According to them, those Mahila Pradhan Agents engaged prior to 01.04.2007 are getting monthly incentive as also bonus and therefore denial of the said benefits to them would amount to discrimination. The petitioners, therefore, seek a declaration that they are also entitled to get monthly incentive and bonus as disbursed to the Mahila Pradhan Agents engaged prior to 01.04.2007.
W.P.(C).No. 36630 of 2009
-3-
Government. The stand taken by the State in the counter affidavit is that in the appointment orders issued to the petitioners, it has been specifically stated that they will be entitled only to the commission paid by the Central Government through Post offices and therefore the claim for incentive is contrary to their terms of engagement. It is also contended by the State Government in the counter affidavit that the petitioners have also submitted consent letters declaring that they are ready to work with the commission to be paid by the Central Government.
Mahila Pradhan Agents based on the undertaking that they will work without incentive and bonus, they cannot claim
the said benefits after the engagement on the ground of
-4-
W.P.(C).No. 36630 of 2009
discrimination.
The writ petition, in the circumstances, is devoid of
merits the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE
bpr
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Mahila Pradhan Agents engaged after 01.04.2007 are entitled to monthly incentive and bonus comparable to pre-2007 agents.
Whether the petitioners can claim discriminatory benefits after consenting to work without incentive and bonus.
Whether the conflict between Commission appointment undertakings and State encouragement of the scheme enables a claim for retroactive benefits.
Neethusha Sreejith and Others
District Collector, Ernakulam
P.B. Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
