Allowed

Udayakumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Mar 2018WA/228/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed this writ appeal in a service dispute regarding arrears from grade promotion. The court directed respondents to grant benefits to appellants in accordance with a prior final judgment, setting aside the dismissal of their review petition and directing payment within two months.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal allowed; order in R.P.No.930/2014 set aside; appellants granted benefits in accordance with prior judgment; respondents directed to grant benefits and pay arrears within two months.

Udayakumar Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANNIE JOHN

¶5

MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1939

¶6

WA.No. 228 of 2015 IN RP. 930/2014

¶7

-----------------------------------

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RP 930/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 09-01-2015 AND

¶9

W.P.(C) NO.18898/2013 DATED 08.01.2014 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶10

APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS :

¶11

1 UDAYAKUMAR C., PORTER/HELPER, HANTEX HEAD OFFICE, OOTTUKUZHY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 (AGED 43, S/O.CHELLAPPAN PUNNAVILA VEEDU, THIYOOR, BALARAMAPURAM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM)

¶12

2 AJITH KUMAR B., PORTER, HANTEX HEAD OFFICE, OOTTUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 (AGED 56, S/O.BABU, AKHILAM, KADAKKAVILAKAM, ANAYARA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM)

¶13

BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN

¶14

SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR SRI.K.S.MIZVER

¶15

RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS :

¶16

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001

¶17

2. DIRECTOR OF HANDLOOM AND TEXTILES, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001

¶18

3. MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, NO.N.H.232, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶19

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. POOJA SURENDRAN

¶20

BY ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA, SC, HANTEX

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :

¶22

RKM

¶23

K. SURENDRA MOHAN & ANNIE JOHN, JJ.

¶24

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶25

W.A.No. 228 of 2015

¶26

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶27

Dated this the 12^th day of March, 2018

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Surendra Mohan, J.

¶30

This appeal is filed against the Order in R.P.No.930 of 2014 dated 09.01.2015 and against the judgment in W.P.(C).No.18898 of 2013 dated 08.01.2014 to a limited extent. The appellants are working as Porters under the 3^rd respondent. The first appellant was recruited in 1989 while the 2^nd appellant was recruited in 1994. Though they were granted their higher grades on completion of ten years as per Ext.P3 dated 19.08.2006, the monetary benefits were granted only with effect from 01.05.2006. It was questioning Ext.P3 that the writ petition was filed by them. Though the claim of the appellants were opposed by the respondents, the learned Single Judge by judgment dated 08.01.2014 held that if the benefits claimed have been granted to all other employees, the claim of the appellants shall also be considered in accordance with the law.

¶31

The appellants thereafter sought for a review of the said judgment, producing Annexure 2 judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 12.08.2009 in W.P.(C).No.14388 of 2009. As per the said judgment, a similar claim made by a worker and a union is stated to have been allowed. The said writ petition was disposed of with the following directions :-

¶32

W.A.No. 228 of 2015

¶33

¶34

In the result, I allow this writ petition, quash Ext.P4 and P5 to the extend they limit payment of arrears consequent on grade promotion only with effect from 01.05.2006. It is declared that the second petitioner and the other persons named in Ext.P1, who have been granted grade promotion with effect from 01.06.2000, will be entitled to payment of arrears consequent on grade promotion with effect from that date. Respondents 3 and 4 are directed to compute and pay arrears consequent on the grant of grade promotion to the second petitioner and the other persons named in Ext.P1 with effect from the date on which they were given grade promotion. Orders in that regard shall be issued and arrears disbursed within three months from the date on which the petitioners produce a certified copy of this judgment before the Managing Director of HANTEX. I also direct respondents 3 and 4 to take a decision in the matter of payment of second time bound higher grade promotion with effect from 01.06.2008 to the persons named in Ext.P1 except Sri.K.Sivan Nair and Sri. K. Sasidharan Nair, who have retired from service prior to that date. A decision in that regard shall also be taken within the aforesaid period of three months.

¶35

The learned Single Judge has however dismissed the review petition holding that the claim of the appellants was belated and that there were no grounds to review the judgment, as sought for.

¶36

Heard. We have perused the judgment Annexure 2, the operative portion of which has already been reproduced above. We are told that the said judgment has become final and in compliance with the direction therein, a number of persons have

¶37

W.A.No. 228 of 2015

¶38

¶39

been granted relief. We notice that the stipulation limiting payment of arrears on grade promotion to the period after 01.05.2006 in the proceedings that were under challenge in Annexure 2 judgment, were quashed. In view of the above, we do not find any grounds to deny the benefits of the said judgment to the appellants herein. Since Annexure 2 judgment had not been made the subject matter of an appeal before any Superior Court, the respondents are bound by the dictum therein.

¶40

In the above view of the matter, this writ appeal is allowed. The order appealed against is set aside. There shall be a direction to the respondents to grant the benefit to the appellants herein also in accordance with the direction contained in Annexure 2 judgment extracted above. Such benefits shall be given to the appellants, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE

¶43

Sd/- ANNIE JOHN JUDGE

¶44

True copy

¶45

PA to Judge

¶46

RKM

Udayakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udayakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ambili Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

Y2NAGER,JAWAHAR High School,Ayur Vs the Manager,Thadikkad High School,Kollam

Manager, a.M.L.P.School, Valluvangad Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs K.R.Mayadevi

The State of Kerala Vs Sri.v.K.Balagopala Marar

Bindu K.L. Vs Ansamma Joseph