IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10765 of 2006(F)
1. T.K.THANKARAJ,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
3. THE CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE
For Respondent :SRI.JOSE J.MATHEIKEL, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :16/09/2010
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.10765 OF 2006
-------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is presently working as Overseer-Higher
Grade) in the Kerala State Electricity Board. The petitioner
started service as an Electricity Worker and by promotions he
became Line Helper, Line Assistant, Senior Line Assistant and as
Overseer. While the petitioner was so working as Overseer, the
Board created a post of Meter Reader and appointed overseers
having the prescribed qualifications as Meter Readers. The
petitioner’s grievance in this writ petition is that a junior of the
petitioner in the cadre of Overseer is drawing higher pay than the
petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of
stepping up of pay in accordance with Ext.P1 Board order. The
petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus or certiorari or other appropriate writ calling
for records relating to Ext.P10 and Ext.P11 and quash
the same holding the same as illegal and amounting to
denial of equality and legal right of the petitioner.
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of Mandamus or other appropriate writ directing
the respondents 1 to 3 herein to immediately conferW.P.(c)No.10765/06 2
the benefits Ext.P1 board order to the petitioner and
step up the salary of the petitioner to give parity to
him in the matter of salary with his juniors like
Mr.Reghuvaran, who is entry No.2150 in Ext.P2
gradation list.
(iii) Allow the petitioner to recover from the
2nd respondent the full costs incurred for the
institution and conduct of the writ petition”.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
first respondent wherein in paragraphs 5 and 6 it is stated
thus:
“5. It is submitted that, on verification of the related
documents, it is noted that the junior is drawing a
higher pay of Rs.2,425/- (Rs.1225-2425) with effect
from 18.08.1993 i.e., from the date on which he was
promoted as Meter Reader while the petitioner draws
Rs.2,195/- on that date. The anomaly has arisen since
the junior enjoyed the additional fixation benefit in the
post of Meter Reader as compared to the petitioner.
After the creation of the intermediary post of Meter
Reader an Order (B.O No.PSI/84/88(55) dated
05.10.1990) was subsequently issued by the Board
prescribing the qualifications and method of
appointment for the post of Meter Readers. The
petitioner is not having any of the Trade Certificates
mentioned in the said Board order. The Board order
dated 30.12.1993 permits junior senior fixation only to
those qualified lower category employees who were
promoted as Overseers prior to the creation of the post
of Meter Reader.
6. It is submitted that, the Board vide B.O
No.2473/93 (PSI/1533/93) dated 30.12.1993, permits
the benefit of Junior- Senior fixation of pay in the post
of Overseer to those qualified lower category
employees, who were promoted as Overseers prior to
the creation of the intermediary post of Meter reader
and who did not get the Rule 28A fixation benefit for
the same”
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. Going
by Ext.P1, the petitioner would be entitled to stepping up of
W.P.(c)No.10765/06 3
pay if the junior of the petitioner is drawing higher pay than
the petitioner. The petitioner’s contention is that a junior of
the petitioner, who is working as Meter Reader, is drawing
higher pay. From the counter affidavit, it is clear that, that
junior is drawing higher pay not in the cadre of Overseer but in
the cadre of Meter Reader on account of fixation of pay when
he was promoted as Meter Reader. Admittedly, the petitioner
does not have the qualifications prescribed for appointment as
Meter Reader. If he had the qualifications, he would also have
been appointed as a Meter Reader in which case he would also
have drawn the same salary as that of his junior. Therefore,
the situation of the petitioner drawing lesser salary than his
junior is not the one contemplated in Ext.P1 Board order, so as
to enable the petitioner to be eligible for stepping up of pay in
par with his junior. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to
the benefit of stepping up of pay as provided in Ext.P1 Board
order. Consequently, the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs
prayed for and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
acd
W.P.(c)No.10765/06 4
W.P.(c)No.10765/06 5