High Court Kerala High Court

K.R.Annaraj vs Kerala State Electronics … on 22 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.R.Annaraj vs Kerala State Electronics … on 22 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22849 of 2010(E)


1. K.R.ANNARAJ,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SURESH KUMAR K.,
3. PANKAJAKSHAN G.,
4. RIFAYUDEEN S.,
5. MANIKANTAN NAIR T.,
6. SREEDHARAN G.,
7. BABY G.,
8. CHANDRIKA,
9. RAJESWARI M.,
10. RAJAGOPALAN C.,
11. ALI AKBAR,
12. BUHARI M.,
13. A.P.KARUNAKARAN,
14. K.PRASANNAN,
15. B.SURENDRAN NADAR,
16. A.PONNUMONY,
17. PADMINI B.,
18. MANOHARAN NAIR N.,
19. KOCHUTHRESIA LOUISE,
20. SASIKALA DEVI K.V.,
21. AMBIKA.S,PERSONAL ASSISTANT,TDC/CTC,
22. PREMAKUMARI.K,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT ,
23. N.N.MOHANAN,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT ,
24. SUBAIR KUNJU,FOREMAN,T/W.P.E.G,
25. M.RAJENDRAN NAIR,FOREMAN,
26. D.MANOHARAN,FOREMAN,
27. M.S.GEETHAKUMARI,JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
28. JAYAKUMARAN NAIR.V,FOREMAN,
29. K.P.USHA,FOREMAN,SSG,
30. REMANI GOPINATH,IDCP,FOREMAN,
31. KUMARI SHEELA L.,
32. MADHURI K.,
33. THEVABALA S.,
34. USHA RANJAN J., SENIOR ASSISTANT I,
35. THULASI P., JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
36. NAMADEVAN N.,

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

3. KELTRON EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (CITU)

4. KELTRON EMPLOYEES UNION REGISTRATION

5. KELTRON EMPLOYEES ORGANISATION,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.J.HARIKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :22/07/2010

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
               --------------------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C) NO.22849 OF 2010(E)
               --------------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are employees in the workmen category. In this writ

petition their grievance is that in the matter of payment of dearness

allowance they are discriminated as compared to those in the

executive category. It is stated that either representations were

rejected and that the anomaly was not rectified even during the

subsequent pay revisions. It is with this grievance that the writ

petition is filed.

2. Admittedly the petitioners are workmen as defined under

the Industrial Disputes Act. Their claim is for parity in Dearness

allowance with that of the employees in executive category. It is a

matter which the petitioners have to raise by way of an Industrial

Dispute before the Industrial Tribunal or before the Labour Court

constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act.

Writ petition fails and is dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/

WPC.No. /09
:2 :