Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
V.A.Vijayan vs Cochin University Of Science And on 17 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35875 of 2010(H)


1. V.A.VIJAYAN, VELIPARAMBIL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE FINANCE OFFICER, COCHIN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SIBY MATHEW

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM,SC,CUSAT,COCHIN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :17/12/2010

 O R D E R
                              S. Siri Jagan, J.
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                       W.P(C) No. 35875 of 2010
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
            Dated this, the 17th day of December, 2010.

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, while working as a Special Grade Peon, retired

from service on 30.4.2005 on attaining superannuation from the

school of Marine Science of the 1st respondent University. The

petitioner originally joined as a Watchman on 31.7.1968. The

petitioner had a total service of 36 years and 9 months as on the date

of retirement. The petitioner’s grievance in this writ petition is that

the petitioner has not been given the 25 year time bound higher

grade, consequent pay fixation and consequent retirement benefits

with reference to such pay fixation, which, according to the petitioner,

the petitioner is entitled to in view of the 8th Pay Revision, which was

implemented in the respondent-University. The petitioner submits

that the claim of a similarly placed person was upheld by this Court

by Ext. P8 judgment, consequent to which the University has passed

Ext. P9 order, granting identical benefit to that person. The

petitioner seeks similar benefits in this writ petition. The petitioner

submits that seeking this relief, the petitioner has already filed

Exts.P10 and P11 before the 1st respondent. The petitioner seeks a

direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.

P10 and P11 expeditiously.

2. Counsel for the University seeks further time to get

instructions. Insofar as I am only directing the 1st respondent to

consider Exts.P10 and P11 in the light of Exts. P8 and P9, I do not

think that this case should be further adjourned for enabling the

standing counsel to get instructions. In the above circumstances, this

writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to

W.P.C. No. 35875/2010. -: 2 :-

consider and pass orders on Exts.P10 and P11 in the light of Exts.P8

and P9 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/

[TRUE COPY]

P.S TO JUDGE.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

66 queries in 0.110 seconds.