IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29356 of 2008(T)
1. T.D.PARAMEESWARAN UNNI.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA
... Respondent
2. THE STATE OF KERALA
For Petitioner :SRI.T.P.KELU NAMBIAR (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE THOMAS (MEVADA)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :10/11/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN,J.
—————————————-
W.P.(C) No. 29356 of 2008 – T
—————————————-
Dated 10th November, 2009
Judgment
The petitioner, an advocate by profession, was appointed
as full time Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala with effect
from 6.4.1981 in the scale of pay of Rs.800-25-900-30-1200.
He was also entitled to dearness allowance at the applicable
rates. He held office as full time Secretary of the Bar Council of
Kerala till 30.11.1998. Thereafter, he continued on extended
service as Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala till 31.5.1999.
2. After the petitioner was appointed as full time
Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala, the post of Secretary of
the Bar Council of Kerala was equated with the post of
Subordinate Judge with effect from 1.4.1990 and placed in the
scale of pay of Rs.2640-85-2725-100-2925-125-3675-140-3815
as per resolution No.57/91 dated 7.4.1991 of the Bar Council
of Kerala. The Bar Council of Kerala also resolved to pay DA,
HRA and CCA admissible to Government servants from time to
time with effect from 1.4.1990. The petitioner was thereupon
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 2
placed in the said scale of pay with effect from 1.4.1990 and
given DA, HRA and CCA admissible to Government servants
from to time. Later, by resolution No.106/95 dated
27.8.1995, the Bar Council of Kerala resolved as follows:
“Resolved that the Secretary be paid the scale of
pay of District Judge of Rs.5100-150-5700 with
admissible DA, HRA, CCA applicable to the post from time
to time with effect from 1.1.1995.”
3. The petitioner states that it was the usual practice in
the Bar Council of Kerala to implement the pay revision orders
issued by the Government from time to time and extend the
benefits flowing therefrom to the Secretary and other members
of the staff of the Bar Council of Kerala. After the Bar Council
of Kerala adopted the resolution dated 27.8.1995 referred to
above, the Government issued G.O.(P) No.3000/98/Fin. dated
25.11.1998 revising the scale of pay of Government servants.
The said revision of pay was not implemented in the case of
the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala since the scale of pay
of District Judge was not revised by the State Government.
However, pursuant to the decision of the Special Committee of
the Bar Council of Kerala, the revision of pay ordered by the
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 3
Government in G.O.(P) No.3000/98/Fin. dated 25.11.1998 was
made applicable to the subordinate staff of the Bar Council of
Kerala.
4. The term of the Bar Council of Kerala that was
constituted on 28.1.1992 expired on 27.1.1997. Shortly before
the said term expired, the Bar Council of Kerala moved the Bar
Council of India seeking extension of its term by six months.
After the term of five years expired, the Bar Council of India
passed a resolution extending the term of the Bar Council of
Kerala by a period of six months. During the said period of six
months, elections were held and the Bar Council of Kerala was
re-constituted. The election thus held during the extended
term of Bar Council of Kerala was challenged in this Court
mainly on the ground that as the term of the Bar Council
expired on 27.1.1997, it ceased to have any jurisdiction to
conduct the election. The writ petition filed challenging the
election was dismissed by this Court and the decision
dismissing the writ petition was affirmed by the Division Bench
in writ appeal. It was held that the term of the Bar Council of
Kerala should be treated to have been extended by the Bar
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 4
Council of India before the expiry of its original term. The
petitioner who moved this Court carried the matter in appeal to
the Apex Court. By judgment delivered on 16.3.1999 in Babu
Varghese v. Bar Council of Kerala (1999 (1) KLT 836 SC),
the Apex Court held that the Bar Council of Kerala constituted
on 28.1.1992 ceased to have any jurisdiction on the expiry of
its term on 27.1.1997 and that the extension of its term by the
Bar Council of India after the said date is illegal. Consequently,
the Apex Court held that the election held by the Bar Council of
Kerala during its extended term was of no consequence. The
Apex Court held that only a Special Committee appointed by
the Bar Council of India under section 8A of the Advocates Act,
1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) could have
held the elections after 27.1.1997. The Apex Court accordingly
directed the Bar Council of India to appoint a Special
Committee as contemplated by section 8A of the Act. A
Special Committee consisting of the then Advocate General
and two members of the former Bar Council of Kerala was
accordingly constituted under section 8A of the Act.
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 5
5. As noticed earlier, though the scale of pay of
Government servants was revised by G.O.(P) No.3000/98/Fin.
dated 25.11.1998 and the said pay revision order was
implemented in the case of the subordinate staff of the Bar
Council of Kerala, it was not implemented in the case of the
Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala. This was for the reason
that the said Government order did not apply to judicial
officers. Shortly thereafter, the petitioner retired from service
on 30.11.1998. In the meanwhile, the First National Judicial
Pay Commission chaired by Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.Jagannatha
Shetty recommended grant of interim relief to judicial officers.
The Government of Kerala implemented the said recommenda-
tion by issuing G.O. (Ms.) No.116/98/Home dated 30.5.1998
whereby judicial officers in the State of Kerala were granted
interim relief at the rate of 35% of basic pay plus D.A. as on
1.1.1996, with effect from 1.7.1996. The petitioner, who was
placed on the scale of pay of District Judge, with admissible DA,
HRA and CCA applicable to the post of District Judge thereupon
submitted Ext.P1 representation dated 24.4.1999 before the
Chairman of the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 6
requesting that as he has been placed in the scale of pay of
District Judge with admissible DA, HRA and CCA, necessary
orders may be issued implementing G.O. (Ms.)
No.116/98/Home dated 30.5.1998 with effect from 1.7.1996
and interim relief at the rate of 35% of the basic pay plus D.A.
as on 1.1.1996 may be given to him with effect from 1.7.1996
till his retirement on 30.11.1998. The Special Committee of
the Bar Council of Kerala constituted under section 8A of the
Act considered Ext.P1 representation and resolved to pay the
petitioner the sum of Rs.1,09,214/- being 35% of the basic pay
plus D.A. as on 1.1.1996 as interim relief for a period of 29
months from 1.7.1996 to 30.11.1998. Payment was also
effected by cheque dated 17.8.1999, that was sent to the
petitioner along with Ext.P2 letter dated 18.8.1999.
6. Nearly two years thereafter, State Government issued
G.O. (Ms.) No.231/01/Home dated 12.12.2001 revising the
scale of pay of judicial officers in the light of the
recommendations of the First National Judicial Pay Commission
chaired by Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.Jagannatha Shetty, with effect
from 1.7.1996. In the meanwhile, the Bar Council of Kerala was
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 7
reconstituted after fresh elections. The petitioner thereupon
submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 24.2.2002 before the
Bar Council of Kerala claiming the benefit of G.O. (Ms.)
No.231/01/Home dated 12.12.2001, a copy of which was also
enclosed along with the said representation. In Ext.P3, the
petitioner claimed that as the scale of pay of District Judge has
been revised by the Government order dated 12.12.2001 from
Rs.5100-150-5700 to Rs.16750-400-19150-450-20500 with
effect from 1.7.1996, he is entitled to have his pay revised with
effect from 1.7.1996 and for payment of arrears together with
DA, HRA and CCA admissible to the post of District Judge as
claimed in the statement appended to Ext.P3. In Ext.P3, the
petitioner claimed payment of the total sum of Rs.2,94,532/-.
The petitioner also brought to the notice of the Bar Council of
Kerala that he was given interim relief sanctioned to District
Judges by the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala
after G.O. (Ms.) No.116/98/Home dated 30.5.1998 was issued.
7. The Bar Council of Kerala considered Ext.P3
representation and referred it to a sub committee. The sub
committee conducted a hearing on 3.1.2004 in which the
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 8
petitioner was heard. The sub committee thereafter submitted
a report to the Bar Council of Kerala wherein the committee
took the stand that Bar Council of Kerala had at its meeting
held on 19.8.2001 fixed the pay of the petitioner’s successor in
the scale of pay of Rs.12600-375-15000 with DA at 32% of the
basic pay, HRA and CCA, with effect from 1.9.2001. In the
report, one of the members of the sub committee had also
stated that the words “from time to time” occurring in the
resolution dated 27.8.1995, qualifies only the admissible DA,
HRA and CCA applicable to the post of District Judge and not
the scale of pay of District Judge and therefore, the scale of pay
of the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala will remain static
at Rs. 5100-150-5900 even if the scale of pay of District Judge
is later revised. The Bar Council of Kerala that met on
11.9.2004 and 9.10.2004 approved the report of the sub
committee and rejected the petitioner’s request in Ext.P3.
Ext.P4 letter dated 13.5.2005 was thereupon sent to the
petitioner enclosing a copy of the report of the sub committee
and informing him that his request has been
rejected. Aggrieved by the stand taken by the sub committee
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 9
of the Bar Council of Kerala in its report and by the Bar Council
of Kerala which accepted it, the petitioner submitted a
representation dated 7.3.2007 pointing out the fallacy of
reasoning of the sub committee. The Bar Council of Kerala that
met on 16.9.2007 considered the said representation and
resolved to reject it. The decision taken by the Bar Council of
Kerala rejecting the representation dated 7.3.2007 was
communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P5 letter dated
6.3.2008. The petitioner thereafter sent a letter on 25.7.2008
requesting the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala to furnish
him the full text of the resolution adopted by the Special
Committee at its meeting held on 12.8.1999. The information
sought was furnished to the petitioner by Ext.P6 letter dated
30.7.2008 wherein the resolution adopted by the Special
Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala on 12.8.1999 granting
the petitioner interim relief with effect from 1.7.1996 pursuant
to the recommendations of the First National Judicial Pay
Commission was extracted. This writ petition was thereupon
filed challenging Exts.P4 and P5 and seeking the following
reliefs:
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 10
“(i) declare that the writ petitioner is entitled to the
benefit of Resolution No.106/95 of the Bar Council of
Kerala, whereunder his claim for the increase in the salary
had to be conceded
(ii) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, quashing the decisions of the Bar
Council of Kerala, which were communicated to the writ
petitioner under Exhibits P4 and P5, rejecting the claim of
the writ petitioner for enhanced salary as claimed in
Exhibit P3;
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Bar
Council of Kerala to concede the request of the writ
petitioner in Exhibit P3 and disburse to him the amount
claimed therein with interest;
(iv) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, quashing the report of the Sub
committee of the Bar Council, as communicated to the
writ petitioner in Exhibit P4;”
8. The petitioner contends that in the light of the
resolution adopted by the Special Committee of the Bar Council
of Kerala on 12.8.1999 which is set out in Ext.P6 and resolution
No.106/95 dated 27.8.1995 adopted by the Bar Council of
Kerala, he is entitled to have his pay fixed as claimed in Ext.P3
with effect from 1.7.1996 and for payment of arrears thereof
together with DA, HRA and CCA applicable to the post of
District Judge from time to time. The petitioner contends that
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 11
the reasoning of the sub committee of the Bar Council of
Kerala referred to in the report and the interpretation placed by
the sub committee on resolution No.106/95 are faulty and
incorrect. The petitioner contends that as long as resolution
No.106/95 stands and as his claim for interim relief has been
conceded and granted by the Special Committee of the Bar
Council of Kerala, the stand taken by the sub committee of the
Bar Council of Kerala and the Bar Council of Kerala in Exts.P4
and P5 cannot be sustained. He also contends that as there is
no ambiguity in resolution No.106/95 adopted by the Bar
Council of Kerala and the terms and stipulations therein are
clear and cogent, he is entitled to increased salary and
allowances payable to District Judges.
9. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Bar
Council of Kerala. Relying on the report of the sub committee
constituted by the Bar Council of Kerala a copy of which is
produced as Ext.R2 (a), it is contended that there is no conflict
between the findings and conclusions in the said report and
resolution No.106/95. It is contended that the sub committee
had dealt with the claim put forward by the petitioner, that the
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 12
reasoning of the sub committee is perfectly valid and legal,
that the petitioner was not a District Judge and a member of
the judicial service and therefore, the benefits flowing from
G.O. (Ms.) No.231/01/Home dated 12.12.2001 will apply only if
it is adopted by the Bar Council of Kerala after due deliberation.
It is also contended that the scale of pay granted to the
petitioner’s successor was only R.12600-375-15000 with DA at
32% of the basic pay, HRA and CCA with effect from 1.9.2001.
10. I heard Sri.T.P.Kelu Nambiar, the learned Senior
Advocate appearing for the petitioner, Sri.George Thomas
Mevada, the learned counsel appearing for the Bar Council of
Kerala and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Senior
Government Pleader appearing for the State of Kerala. I have
considered the pleadings and the submissions made at the Bar
by the learned counsel appearing on either side and gone
through copies of the various resolutions that were made
available by the learned counsel appearing for the Bar Council
of Kerala. The dispute raised in this writ petition, in my
opinion, centres round the interpretation to be placed on
resolution No.106/95 dated 27.9.1995 adopted by the Bar
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 13
Council of Kerala. The petitioner was appointed as Secretary
of the Bar Council of Kerala in the scale of pay of Rs.800-25-
900-30-1200 with admissible DA. Later, with effect from
1.4.1990, the post of Secretary was equated with the post of
Subordinate Judge and placed in the scale of pay of Rs.2640-
85-2725-100-2925-125-3675-140-3815, as per resolution
No.57/91 dated 7.4.1991. The said resolution reads as follows:
“Resolved that the Secretary be and is hereby
placed in a new scale of pay of Rs.2640-85-2725-100-
2925-125-3675-140-3815 with effect from 1.4.1990.
Resolved further that the Secretary be and is hereby
permitted to draw increment in the revised scale of pay
with effect from 1.4.1990.
Further resolved that the Dearness Allowance, HRA,
CCA admissible to Government servants from time to time
be paid to the Secretary from 1.4.1990 onwards.”
11. Though by resolution dated 7.4.1991, the scale of pay
of the Secretary of Bar Council of Kerala was equated with the
then scale of pay of Subordinate Judge, the resolution dated
7.4.1991 did not state in express terms that the post of
Secretary is equated with that of Subordinate Judge. Instead,
the Secretary was only given the then scale of pay of
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 14
Subordinate Judge with effect from 1.4.1990. That resolution
also did not stipulate that as and when the scale of pay of
Subordinate Judge is revised, the scale of pay of the Secretary
will be revised. Later, the Bar Council of Kerala that met on
27.8.1995 , resolved that the Secretary be paid the scale of pay
of District Judge with admissible DA, HRA and CCA applicable to
the post from time to time with effect from 1.1.1996. The
wordings of the resolution dated 7.4.1991 are totally different
from the resolution dated 27.8.1995. While in the former, the
words “from time to time” are singularly lacking, by the latter
resolution, the Bar Council of Kerala resolved to place the
Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala in the scale of pay of
District Judge with admissible DA, HRA and CCA applicable to
the post “from time to time”. From the resolution dated
27.8.1995, it is evident that whenever the scale of pay of
District Judge is revised, the Secretary of the Bar Council will be
entitled to such revision. The Special Committee of the Bar
Council of Kerala constituted under section 8A of the Act that
met on 12.8.1999 understood the resolution dated 27.8.1995
as one entitling the petitioner to receive payment of interim
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 15
relief granted to District Judges in terms of G.O. (Ms.)
No.116/98/Home dated 30.5.1998. The petitioner’s request for
interim relief was accepted by the Special Committee and
payment was also effected. The petitioner retired from service
on 30.11.1998. A few days prior to that date, G.O.(P)
No.3000/98/Fin. dated 25.11.1998 was issued revising the
scale of pay of Government employees. However, the said pay
revision order did not apply to judicial officers. The scale of
pay of judicial officers was revised by G.O. (Ms.)
No.231/2001/Home dated 12.12.2001 with retrospective effect
from 1.7.1996. The petitioner thereupon claimed arrears of
salary and allowances based on the revised scale of pay of
District Judge with which post, the post of Secretary of the Bar
Council had been equated by resolution dated 27.8.1995.
12. Section 8A of the Advocates Act, 1961 contemplates
the appointment of a Special Committee to discharge the
functions of the State Bar Council until a Bar Council is
constituted under the Act. It was in exercise of the said power
that a Special Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala was
constituted on the expiry of the term of the Bar Council of
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 16
Kerala on 27.1.1992 pursuant to the decision of the Apex Court
in Babu Varghese v. Bar Council of Kerala (supra). On the
terms of section 8A of the Act, the decision taken by the
Special Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala at its meeting
held on 12.8.1999 should be deemed to be a decision taken by
the Bar Council of Kerala for the reason that it was discharging
the functions of the State Bar Council. The petitioner’s claim
for payment of salary and allowances at the rate applicable to a
District Judge in terms of G.O. (Ms.) No.231/2001/Home dated
12.12.2001 is resisted on two grounds. The first ground is that
the Bar Council of Kerala has not adopted the said Government
order. The second is that the words “applicable to the post
from time to time” relate only to the DA, HRA and CCA
applicable to the post of District Judge and not the scale of pay.
The Bar Council of Kerala does not dispute the fact that
resolution No.106/95 dated 27.8.1995 was adopted by the Bar
Council of Kerala in furtherance of the decision to equate the
post of Secretary with the post of District Judge. The then scale
of pay of District Judge was Rs.5100-150-5700. The Bar
Council of Kerala also decided to pay to the Secretary of the
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 17
Bar Council, DA, HRA and CCA applicable to the post of District
Judge with effect from 1.1.1995. It is also not in dispute that
the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala was placed in the
scale of pay of District Judge and was also paid DA, HRA and
CCA applicable to the post of District Judge. The words
“applicable to the post from time to time”, in my opinion,
qualify not only the DA, HRA and CCA, but also the scale of pay
mentioned in resolution No.106/95. The scale of pay of District
Judge was revised only by G.O.(P) No.231/01/Home dated
12.12.2001 with effect from 1.7.1996. On the terms of the
resolution dated 27.8.1995, the petitioner was entitled to have
his pay fixed in the revised scale of pay with effect from
1.7.1996 and not merely to the revised DA, HRA and CCA with
effect from that date. Therefore, it has to be necessarily held
that on the terms of the resolution dated 27.8.1995, the
petitioner became entitled to be placed in the scale of pay of
Rs.16750-400-19150-450-20500 and for payment of salary and
allowances in the said scale of pay with effect from 1.7.1996 as
claimed by him in Ext.P3 representation. The stand taken by
the sub committee and accepted by the Bar Council of Kerala
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 18
cannot therefore be sustained.
13. The pleadings and the materials placed on record
disclose that before the petitioner retired from service as
Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala, Sri.N.S.Gopakumar was
appointed as Assistant Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala
as per resolution of Bar Council of Kerala dated 27.9.1998 and
he jointed duty on 5.10.1998. After the petitioner attained the
age of superannuation on 30.11.1998, he was permitted to
continue for a period of six months on a consolidated pay of
Rs.15,000/- per mensem. The said period came to an end on
30.5.1999. Sri.N.S.Gopakumar, Assistant Secretary was given
charge of the Secretary from 30.5.1999 onwards. The Special
Committee of the Bar Council of Kerala constituted under
section 8A of the Act, that met on 14.1.2000 resolved to
appoint him as the Secretary of the Bar Council of Kerala from
14.1.2000 and also resolved that he be paid salary in the scale
of pay of District Judge with DA, HRA and CCA admissible to the
post from time to time with effect from 14.1.2000. The Special
Committee also resolved that he will be on probation for a
period of six months from 14.1.2000. The petitioner’s successor
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 19
Sri.N.S.Gopakumar was thus placed in the scale of pay of
District Judge. Thereafter, the Bar Council of Kerala was
reconstituted. The Executive Committee of the reconstituted
Bar Council of Kerala that met on 22.7.2001 took up the issue
regarding declaration of probation and grant of annual
increments to the petitioner’s successor and other officers. The
issue regarding the declaration of probation of the petitioner’s
successor was deferred. As regards the scale of pay of the
Secretary, the Executive Committee recommended that two
alternative pay scales be worked out with the assistance of the
A.G’s. office and the Government Secretariat and placed before
the next meeting of the Executive Committee. The Executive
Committee met thereafter on 19.8.2001 and resolved to
declare the probation of the petitioner’s successor with effect
from 1.9.2001. The Executive Committee also resolved that he
is entitled to the first increment on 1.9.2001. As regards
subsequent increments, the Executive Committee resolved that
since the scale of pay is being revised, the next increment will
become due only after completion of one year from the date of
implementation of the revised scale. The Executive Committee
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 20
also resolved to recommend to the Bar Council of Kerala that
the scale of pay of the Secretary be revised as Rs.12600-375-
15600 with DA at 32% of the basic pay, HRA of Rs.1,000/- and
CCA of Rs.120/- per mensem with effect from 1.9.2001.
14. It is evident from the recommendations of the
Executive Committee of the Bar Council that the scale of pay of
the petitioner’s successor was revised only with effect from
1.9.2001. The petitioner admittedly retired from service with
effect from 30.11.1998, but he continued on extended service
for another six months on a consolidated pay of Rs.15,000/-.
The said period came to an end on 30.5.1999 when the
petitioner’s successor took charge. In my opinion, the decision
taken by the Executive Committee of the Bar Council on
19.8.2001 to revise the scale of pay of the petitioner’s
successor who was appointed as Secretary of the Bar Council of
Kerala by the Special Committee at its meeting held on
14.1.2000 cannot be held out against the petitioner for the
reason that the petitioner had ceased to be in service long
before that date. Any decision taken by the Bar Council or its
Executive Committee after the petitioner ceased to be in
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 21
service, varying the service conditions of the Secretary of the
Bar Council cannot, in my opinion, operate to the detriment to
the petitioner. The Bar Council of Kerala that met on 11.9.2004
when it first rejected the petitioner’s request in Ext.P3 did not
independently consider the issue but, merely resolved to
accept the report of the sub committee. The Bar Council of
Kerala that met on 16.9.2007 also did not independently
consider the issue but, merely resolved to reject the
petitioner’s representation dated 7.3.2007.
15. From the pleadings and materials on record, it is
evident that resolution No.106/95 dated 27.8.1995 adopted
by the Bar Council of Kerala was not varied while the petitioner
was in service, though in the case of the petitioner’s successor,
the Executive Committee of the Bar Council resolved to place
him in a different scale of pay with effect from 1.9.2001. The
decision taken by the Executive Committee of the Bar Council
that met on 19.8.2001 cannot supersede the resolution
adopted by the Bar Council of Kerala on 27.8.1995 or the
resolution adopted by the Special Committee of the Bar Council
of Kerala on 12.8.1999 for the reason that the Executive
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 22
Committee cannot overrule the decision of the Bar Council or
the Special Committee. Even if the decision of the Executive
Committee were to stand, the scale of pay of Secretary was
revised only with effect from 1.9.2001. The rights of the
petitioner who left service long before that date cannot be
determined with reference to the said resolution.
For the reasons stated above, I hold that the stand taken
by the Bar Council of Kerala in Exts.P4 and P5 letters and by
the sub committee of the Bar Council of Kerala in the report
appended to Ext.P4 letter cannot be sustained. I accordingly
allow the writ petition, quash Exts.P4 and P5, declare that the
petitioner is entitled to salary and allowances in terms of G.O.
(Ms.) No.231/01/Home dated 12.12.2001 with effect from
1.7.1996 and direct the Bar Council of Kerala to grant the
request made by the petitioner in Ext.P3 representation by
sanctioning payment of arrears of salary in the scale of pay of
Rs.16750-400-19150-450-20500 together with DA, HRA and
CCA applicable to the post of District Judge from time to time,
for the period from 1.1.1996 to 30.11.1998. The arrears thus
payable to the petitioner shall be quantified and paid within
W.P.(C) No.29356/2008 23
one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a
certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary of the Bar
Council of Kerala. The parties shall bear their respective costs.
P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge
vaa