Disposed

Sindhu.I v. Kerala State Beverages (M & M) Corporation Ltd.

Kerala HC19 Mar 2024WP(C)/37035/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Daily wage abkari worker sought parity of pay with similarly placed workers under the rehabilitation scheme. Relying on the earlier judgment in W.P.(C) No.443 of 2023 and Jagjit Singh, the Court held she is entitled to the same scale of pay from her enrolment date in the Welfare Fund Board.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay the petitioner the same scale of pay as other abkari workers appointed under the rehabilitation scheme, from the date of enrolment in the Welfare Fund Board.

Sindhu.I Vs Kerala State Beverages (M & M)… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

WPC 37035/23

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶7

WP(C) NO.37035OF 2023

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

SINDHU.I,AGED 44 YEARS
D/O LATE RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, THEKKEDATH PADIJATTATHIL,
MUKUNDAPURAM P.O., MADAPPALLY CHAVARA,
KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM, PIN - 691585

¶10

BY ADVS.
DEEPU THANKAN
UMMUL FIDA
LAKSHMI SREEDHAR
LEKSHMI P. NAIR
NAMITHA K.M.

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M & M) CORPORATION LTD BEVCO TOWER, VIKASBHAVAN, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 695033

¶13

2KERALA ABKARI WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS CHIEF WELFARE FUND
INSPECTOR, PIN - 695001

¶14

BY ADV NAVEEN T

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY SC

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

WPC 37035/23

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 19^th day of March 2024)

¶22

The petitioner is working as a daily wage abkari worker in a retail outlet of the 1^st respondent Corporation, as per the orders of the Government under the rehabilitation of the perished abkari workers. She is inducted as a member of the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Scheme and issued with membership card. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the 1^st respondent Corporation is treating her differently and is giving wages not on par with the similarly placed Abkari workers.

¶23

The petitioner seeks for an order or direction to the respondents to pay the same scale of pay as granted to other abkari workers appointed under the rehabilitation scheme by the Government of Kerala and working under the 1^st respondent Corporation.

¶24

This Court, by judgment dated 21.2.2024 in W.P.(C)

¶25

No.443 of 2023 and connected cases, in the light of the judgment of

¶26

WPC 37035/23

¶27

¶28

apex court in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh [2017 (1) SCC 148], disposed of the petitions declaring that the petitioners therein are entitled to the same pay scale as applicable to the other categories of

¶29

Abkari workers.

¶30

The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows:

¶31

“7. It is a fact that the petitioners are all members of the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Board and they will fall into the definition of “Abkari Worker” as defined under Section 2(a) of the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1989. Therefore, they fall into one homogenous group. In such scenarios, there cannot be any difference in pay in respect of members of one group.

¶32

In the light of above judgment of the apex court, there cannot be any distinction between the petitioners and abkari workers, who were given appointments in the 3 other categories mentioned above. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to the same scale of pay as applicable to the other categories of workers referred to in Ext.P4.

¶33

It is made clear that they will be entitled to the benefit only with effect from the date of enrolment in Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Board.”

¶34

The above-said judgment will govern this Writ Petition also.

¶35

SD/-

¶36

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

dl/

WPC 37035/23

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37035/2023

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 09/01/2012

¶43

Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 17548/2014
DATED 21/08/2020

¶44

Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT

¶45

Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 24/02/2011

¶46

Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.P. (C) NO. 38766/2016 DATED 08/02/2017

¶47

Exhibit P6A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.A.NO. 1922/2017 DATED 10/11/2017

¶48

Exhibit P7A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT DATED 04/04/2019

¶49

Exhibit P8A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20/10/2023

Sindhu.I v. Kerala State Beverages (M & M) Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sindhu.I v. Kerala State Beverages (M & M) Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajimol Vs State of Kerala Represented by Chief Secretary

Baiju P.G, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

Shailaja C. Vs State of Kerala

Tara.G., Vs the Chairman

Chandra Babu K.A. Vs Union of India

Muralisharma v K Vs Travancore Devaswom Board