High Court Kerala High Court

N.Subramonia Iyer vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 19 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
N.Subramonia Iyer vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 19 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7425 of 2007(H)


1. N.SUBRAMONIA IYER, RETIRED FINANCE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA  STATE ELECTRICITY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :19/01/2011

 O R D E R
                             S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                       ==================
                        W.P.(C).No.7425 of 2007
                       ==================
                Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011
                             J U D G M E N T

The petitioner started service as an L.D. Clerk on 15.3.1963 in

the Kerala State Electricity Board. He was promoted as U.D. Clerk on

28.1.1970. He was again promoted on Junior Superintendent on

17.3.1980. In November 1981, he got promotion as Divisional

Accountant. By Ext.P1 order dated 23.1.1993, he was appointed as

Finance Officer. He retired from service on 1.9.1996. His grievance in

this writ petition is that the post of Finance Officer is equivalent to the

post of Assistant Accounts Officer and in the post of Assistant Accounts

Officer, the petitioner’s junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, was drawing higher pay

than the petitioner. The petitioner was posted as Finance Officer not on

the basis of his option, but he was required to work as Finance Officer

since the posts of Assistant Accounts Officer and Finance Officer are

equivalent posts. The petitioner’s claim for junior-senior fixation vis-a-

vis his junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, was earlier rejected on the ground that

junior-senior fixation can be granted only between persons in the same

category of posts and the petitioner was working as a Finance Officer

and Sri.Rama Iyer was working as an Assistant Accounts Officer. The

petitioner challenged the same by filing O.P.No.9062/1997. In that

original petition, by Ext.P9 judgment, the order of the Board was

quashed and the Board was directed to reconsider the claim of the

petitioner. Pursuant thereto, Ext.P12 order has been passed again

w.p.c.7425/07 2

rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging

Ext.P12 and seeking the following reliefs:

“i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order calling for the records leading to Exts.P12 and
quashing the same.

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing the respondents to fix the basic pay of the
petitioner at Rs.5495/- with effect from 28.1.1995 and Rs.5725/- with
effect from 1.8.1995 and to give him arrears of salary legitimately due
to him with interest at 18% per annum.

iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing the respondents to refix the pensionary
benefits of the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner was drawing a
basic pay of Rs.5495/- from 28.1.1995 and Rs.5725/- from 1.8.1995
and to give him arrears of Gratuity and arrears of pension with 18%
interest per annum.

iv. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing the respondents to give pension due to the
petitioner based on the Grade promotion to which the petitioner is
legitimately entitled under Prayers (ii) and (iii)”

2. A counter affidavit has been filed seeking to refute the

contentions of the petitioner, to which the petitioner has filed a reply

affidavit also. The parties were heard.

3. As I have stated earlier, the petitioner is seeking junior-

senior fixation vis-a-vis his junior, Sri.Rama Iyer, in the post of

Assistant Accounts Officer. The petitioner himself has produced, along

with I.A.No.408/2011, the Board order dated 19.10.1996 in respect of

the claim for junior-senior fixation. From Ext.P14, I find that junior-

senior fixation is granted subject to the following conditions:

“(i) The senior and junior employees should belong to the same
category and should have been promoted to the same category
of post.

(ii) The anomaly should not be due to differences in weightage.

(iii) The anomaly should have been arisen directly as a result of the
pay revision granted with effect from 01.07.1993/01.08.1993.

w.p.c.7425/07 3

(iv) In case where the pay of an employee is stepped up in terms of
(1) & (2) above, the next increment shall be granted after
completing the period required to earn an increment from the
date of such step up.

(v) The fixation of pay as on 01.07.1993 or 01.08.1993, of both the
senior and the junior should be got approved by the FA & CAO
before allowing such step-up.

(vi) The seniority should be checked with reference to approved
gradation list and on detailed entry showing the serial number
of both the senior and junior made in the service book.

(vii) The step-up should be allowed by an authority competent to
approve fixation of pay as stipulated in cl.xiii of the Audit
circular No.1/LTS dated 17.10.1995.”

(underlining supplied)

Therefore, among other things, the petitioner should prove that the

anomaly in the fixation of pay vis-a-vis that of his junior had arisen

directly as a result of the pay revision granted with effect from

1.7.1993/1.8.1993. From the averments in the writ petition as well as

the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am not

satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case of anomaly in the pay

of the petitioner vis-a-vis that of Sri.Rama Iyer as a direct

consequence of the fixation of pay as per the pay revision granted with

effect from 1.7.1993/1.8.1993. Insofar as the petitioner can claim

junior-senior fixation only if the anomaly in pay vis-a-vis his junior had

arisen directly as a result of the pay revision granted with effect from

1.7.93/1.8.93, the petitioner cannot succeed in this writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

sdk+                                                     S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
           ///True copy///

                                  P.A. to Judge

w.p.c.7425/07    4