Dismissed

Sasikumar.S v. Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technologhy

Kerala HC21 Oct 2020OP (CAT)/119/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a revision petition challenging an order closing the respondent's application for implementation of a Tribunal direction as infructuous. The Court held that once the direction was complied with and no substantive dispute remained regarding pay fixation, the lower court acted correctly.

What did the court decide?

The Original Petition (CAT) is dismissed.

Sasikumar.S Vs Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 29TH ASWINA, 1942

¶7

OP (CAT).No.119 OF 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER IN M.A.No.180/00705/in OA 180/00179/2015 DATED 13-08-2018 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

SASIKUMAR.S AGED 64 YEARS DEPUTY DIRECTOR ( RETIRED), SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011, RESIDING AT SREEDHAR BHAVAN, MAVARTHALA, KALLAMPALLY, MEDICAL COLLEGE POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.S.VISHNU

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGHY REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011.

¶14

2 THE GOVERNING BODY OF SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011.

¶15

3 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, NEW MEHRAULI ROAD, TECHNOLOGY BHAVAN, NEW DELHI 110 016.

¶16

4 SHINY GEORGE AMBAT, FINANCIAL ADVISOR, SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 011. -(DELETED) RESPONDENT

¶17

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

¶18

¶19

NO.4 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER THE ORDER DATED 11.3.2020 IN IA NO.1/2020 IN OP(CAT) NO. 119/19

¶20

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ R3- BY SRI. P. VIJAYAKUMAR - ASGI

¶21

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 21st day of October 2020

¶26

Shaffique, J.

¶27

The Original Petition has been filed challenging an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in M.A.No.180/705/2017 seeking to implement an order by which an application for implementing order dated 9.6.2016 in the O.A. No.180/179/2015 came to be closed as infructuous.

¶28

In the order dated 9.6.2016 in the O.A.No.180/179/2015, the petitioner was given a relief as mentioned in Paragraph 5.6, which reads as under:-

¶29

“5.6.The respondent institution has adopted the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008. Having adopted the RP Rules the respondent has also adopted the specific FR provisions which govern the implementation of the CCS(RP) Rules, 2008. Consequent on the implementation of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, the pay under FR 35 shall be restricted so as to not to exceed the basic pay in the revised scale by more than 12.5% of the basic pay subject to maximum of Rs.2000 per month. Hence the applicant is entitled to Rs.2000 per month instead of Rs.1500 approved by the Governing Board for discharging the additional duties of Deputy Director and the relief is allowed accordingly. The DA enhanced from 72% to 80% is admissible on the 10 days earned leave encashment and is payable to the applicant as the said DA was admissible on the date of encashment availed by the applicant and the relief in O.A.No.179/2015 is allowed accordingly.”

¶30

The petitioner's contention was that Rs.2,000/- per month, which he was entitled to receive instead of Rs.1500/-, was approved by the Governing Board for discharging the additional duties of Deputy Director and ought to have been added to his pay during the relevant time and should not have been treated as a mere allowance. Since the direction issued by the Tribunal was not implemented, the petitioner also filed a contempt case.

¶31

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

¶32

¶33

However, during the pendency of the contempt case, direction had been complied with by the respondents and accordingly, the contempt case was closed. Since nothing further survived to be decided in the case filed by the petitioner as M.A.No.180/705/2017 for implementation of the direction, the application was closed as infructuous.

¶34

Apparently, when a petition is filed seeking implementation of the direction and a contempt case is separately filed, once it is found that the directions issued by the Tribunal had been implemented, nothing further survives to be decided. However, the contention urged by the petitioner is that in the petition filed seeking implementation of the order, the Tribunal ought to have further considered the question whether Rs.2000/which was awarded to him during the aforesaid period while he was rendering additional duty of Deputy Director ought to have been added towards his pay for fixation of pay and allowances, which aspect of the matter was not considered by the Tribunal while disposing of the said application.

¶35

Infact the original application was filed by the petitioner inter alia contending that he was entitled for fixation of pay under FR 49 or Rule 14 of the Sree Chithira Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology (Service) Rules. However, the Tribunal did not accept either of these contentions, but proceeded to observe that in FR 35 there is a restriction of pay, which should

¶36

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

¶37

¶38

not exceed the basic pay subject to maximum of Rs.2000/- per month. Accordingly, the said amount of Rs.2000/- was fixed instead of Rs.1500/-. The application of FR35 itself was not adopted by the respondent institute and the Tribunal has also taken note of the same in paragraph 5.5, which reads as under:- “The respondent institute has not adopted FR 49 or FR 35”.

¶39

Apparently, it is only for the purpose of fixing the quantum of amount to be paid to the petitioner as an allowance that, instead of Rs.1500/-, Rs.2000/- was fixed. Whether the said allowance should be treated as pay or not has not been stated anywhere in the Tribunal's order. Under such circumstances, we do not think that the Tribunal has committed any error in closing the application for implementation of the order as infructuous as nothing further survives to be decided in the said application.

¶40

We do not find any ground to interfere with the said order and the Original Petition (CAT) is dismissed.

¶41

Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

acd

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY OF O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P1 A 16 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. P AND A A. 111/PF-203/SCTIMST/2014 DATED 10.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A 20 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. SCTIST/2014-15 DATED 17.1.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. P & A.I/X/52/SCTIMST /2012 DATED 26.11.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A2 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNING BODY DECISION IN ITS 86TH MEETING DATED 27.12.2012.
EXHIBIT	P1 A3 TRUE EXTRACT OF FR 49.
EXHIBIT	P1 A4 TRUE EXTRACT OF RULE 25 CHAPTER 1 RED WITH RULE 14 CHAPTER 3 OF SERVICE AND PERSONNEL CONDUCT RULES OF SCTIMST.
EXHIBIT	P1 A5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 21.8.2013 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A6 TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION BY THE INTERNAL AUDIT OFFICER DATED 20.9.2013.
EXHIBIT	P1 A7 TRUE EXTRACT OF THE GB AGENDA FOR ITS MEETING DATED 20.12.2013.
EXHIBIT	P1 A8 TRUE EXTRACT OF THE GOVERNING BODY DECISION DATED 2012.2013.
EXHIBIT	P1 A9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. P & A . III/PF-203/SCTIMST-2014 DATED 24.2.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A10 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 10.2.2014 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. A1/17/6/SCTIMST/2014 DATED 4.4.2014 OF

¶52

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

¶53

¶54

	THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE DIRECTOR SCTIMST.
EXHIBIT	P1 A12 TRUE EXTRACT OF GOVERNING BODY DECISION DATED 8.4.2014.
EXHIBIT	P1 A13 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIXATION OF PAY BY GRANTING OFFICIATING PAY AS PER SPCR CHAPTER III RULE 14.
EXHIBIT	P1 A14 TRUE COPY OF THE CORRECTED STATEMENT OF FIXATION IN RESPECT OF THE APPLICANT DATED 5.6.2019.
EXHIBIT	P1 A15 TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER NO. P &A.1/X/22/SCTIMST/2014 DATED 30.06.2014.
EXHIBIT	P1 A17 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. P & A .III/PF- 203/SCTIMST/2014 DATED 21.6.2014.
EXHIBIT	P1 A18 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 8.10.2013 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P1 A19 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.10.2014 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FIELD BY THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED 29.11.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P3 A21 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. P AND A .III/PF- 361/203/1616/2123/SCTIMST/2013 DATED 17.4.2013.
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER 9.6.2016 IN O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 OF THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P5 TRUE COPY OF M.A. NO. 180/00705/2017 IN O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 DATED9.7.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P5 MAI TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL.

¶55

O.P.(CAT)No.119/2019

¶56

¶57

EXHIBIT	P5 MA2	TRUE EXTRACT OF FR 35.
EXHIBIT	P5 MA3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. P AND A.III/PF-203/SCTIMST/2016 DATED 25.7.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5 MA4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.8.2016 IN M.A. NO. 708/2016 IN O.A. NO. 179/2015 OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT	P5 MA5	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.1.2017 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5 MA6	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 4.2.2017 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5 MA7	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. P & A IV/PF- 203/1/SCTIMST/2017 DATED 7.3.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 10/2017 IN M.A. NO. 180/000705/2017 IN O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P7	TRUE COPY OF REJOINDER DATED 12.11.207 IN M.A. NO. 180/00705/2017 IN O.A. NO. 180/00179/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P8	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 13.8.2018 IN C.P.C NO. 180/00079/2017 OF THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.8.2018 IN M.A. NO. 180/000805/2017 OF THE HONBLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.

Sasikumar.S v. Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technologhy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasikumar.S v. Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technologhy

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

Moses Packiamony Vs Union of India

B.Ed College Manager'S Association - Self Financing, Vs State of Kerala

Jiji.P.G Vs Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited

Union of India Vs Revindran Nair.B.

Stephen T.S. Vs State of Kerala

Stephen T.S., Vs State of Kerala