High Court Kerala High Court

The Administrator vs B.C. Abdul Hayath on 19 March, 2007

Kerala High Court
The Administrator vs B.C. Abdul Hayath on 19 March, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 27137 of 2005(S)


1. THE ADMINISTRATOR, UNION TERRITORY
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THE SECRETARY TO ADMINISTRATOR
3. THE PRINCIPAL PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                        Vs



1. B.C. ABDUL HAYATH, PEON,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,SC,LAKSHADWEEP ADMN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.R.RADHAKRISHNAN, CGC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :19/03/2007

 O R D E R
      J.B.KOSHY & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ.

                     -------------------------------

                W.P.(C).NO.27137 OF 2005 (S)

                   -----------------------------------

         Dated this the 19th day of  March, 2007


                           J U D G M E N T

KOSHY,J.

First respondent joined the service as casual labourer in

the department of Agriculture on daily wages on 1.6.1979 and

he was granted temporary status with effect from 1.9.1993 by

order dated 9.10.1996. On 20.2.2001, he was offered

temporary Group D post of Peon in the scale of pay of

Rs.2550 – 55 – 2660 – 3200 along with other allowances and he

was appointed on regular basis in Group D by order dated

17.3.2001 in the scale of pay of Rs.2,840/-, protecting the pay

he was receiving at that time. When action was taken to revise

the payment to Rs.2,550/- contending that he will get only the

minimum of the pay scale when his services were regularised,

he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal. Tribunal

after analysing various cases held that the respondent had very

long service and his protection of pay was correctly done at the

W.P.(C).27137/2005 2

time when he was granted regular employment. When he

was absorbed in Group D post as Peon there is nothing wrong

in protecting the pay that he was drawing. We see no ground

to interfere in the order of the Tribunal as there is no patent

illegality and perverse findings so as to attract Article 227 of

the Constitution of India. Hence this writ petition is dismissed.

J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE

prp

J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.

——————————————————–

O.P.NO. OF 2006 ()

———————————————————

J U D G M E N T

———————————————————

1th January, 2007