High Court Kerala High Court

N.K.Muhammed Zaheer vs The State Of Kerala on 7 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
N.K.Muhammed Zaheer vs The State Of Kerala on 7 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 8126 of 2009(I)


1. N.K.MUHAMMED ZAHEER,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR,

3. DIRECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.P.SAJAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :07/12/2009

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    ================
                 W.P.(C) NO. 8126 OF 2009 (I)
                =====================

           Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioner was a Junior Superintendent under the 2nd

respondent. In this writ petition, what he claims is for wages for

the period 6/9/07 to 30/6/2008 when he worked as a Liaison

Officer in the Advocate General’s Office.

2. Facts of the case show that while working as Junior

Superintendent under the 2nd respondent, petitioner was posted

on deputation as Liaison Officer in the Advocate General’s Office

from 1992 and this continued till 30/4/2006, the date on which

the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation.

According to him, thereafter, he was asked to continue and by

Ext.P1 dated 12/2/007, sanction was accorded by the Government

to appoint the petitioner on contract basis for six months limiting

the monthly pay to emoluments last drawn minus pension.

Accordingly, by Ext.P2 order, he was appointed for the period

upto 6/9/07. Still later, by Ext.P3, sanction was accorded for his

appointment for the period from 1/5/2006 to 19/2/2007. Despite

the expiry of the period of Ext.P2 order of appointment viz.,

WPC 8126/09
:2 :

6/9/07, petitioner continued to discharge the duties and thus

continued till 30/6/2008 when another person was appointed in

his place. But he has not been paid wages for the aforesaid

period and therefore the writ petition is filed.

3. To substantiate the plea that the petitioner has

discharged the duties during the above period, he has produced

Ext.P5 certificate issued by the concerned Government Pleader to

the effect that he had discharged the duties as a Liaison Officer.

He has also produced Exts.P8 to P13 communications issued by

the 2nd and 3rd respondents during the aforesaid period, in

connection with cases concerning their Department.

4. Respondents have filed a statement where they say

there was no Government Order sanctioning his appointment

during the period 6/9/07 to 30/6/2008 and this is the reason for

non payment.

On the materials produced, it is clear that the petitioner has

discharged the duties during the aforesaid period. If so, he is

entitled to be paid. Admittedly payment has not been made

and therefore I dispose of this writ petition directing the

respondents to ensure that the petitioner is paid the amount due

WPC 8126/09
:3 :

to him provided in Ext.P1 order for the period 6/9/07 to

30/6/2008. Needful shall be done and payment will be made, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 months of

production of a copy of this judgment.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp