Kerala High Court
P.Sasidhran vs The Kerala State Road Transport ... on 29 March, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2013/11TH ASHADHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 5099 of 2012 (J)
--------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
P.SASIDHRAN, AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O.PONNU NADAR, MECHANIC GRADE II (RETD.),
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
KATTAKADA,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MUKKUMKAA PUTHENVEEDU, ANAMON
KANDALA P.O., OORUTTAMBALAM VIA., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KARUVATHAZHA,STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-07-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 5099 of 2012 (J)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
-----------------------------------
P1: COPY OF THE ORDER NI.PL.4/17652/05 DATED 29/3/2006
P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.30887/2006
P3: COPY OF THE ORDER O.PL4/017313/09 DATED 13/7/10
P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT CONTEMPT CASE (C)NO.909/2010.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(c) No. 5099 OF 2012
-------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JULY, 2013
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner was advised for appointment as Work Assistant (since now re-designated as Mechanic Grade-II) in the respondent Corporation, on 30-01-1980, based on his position in the rank list prepared after conducting the due process of selection. But the respondent Corporation had not appointed him till 25-11-1996. In the meanwhile juniors in the rank list, who were advised subsequently, had filed writ petitions before this court. Based on the directions issued from this court, they were appointed in the regular service, prior to appointment of the petitioner on 25-11- 1996. The petitioner retired from the service of the respondent during September, 2002, after completing service period of 8 years and 8 months. In view of the fact that the petitioner was not assigned due seniority based on the date of advice made by Public Service Commission, he had approached the respondent for re-fixation of seniority W.P.(c) No.5099/2012 -2- and seeking consequential benefits such as Grade promotion etc. When the request was declined through Ext.P1, he had approached this court in W.P (c) No.30887/2006. In Ext.P2 judgment this court observed that, inter-se seniority between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 in the said writ petition have to be decided in terms of the statutory provisions contained in Rule 27 (c) of Part-II of the KS & SSR. Hence the writ petition was allowed quashing Ext.P1 to the extent it operates against the petitioner. The respondent Corporation was directed to issue consequential order treating the petitioner as senior to respondents 2 and 3 for all intends and purposes. It was further directed that any financial benefits accruing to the petitioner will be released to him within an outer limit of 3 months. But the respondent Corporation again issued Ext.P3 finding that the petitioner, eventhough advised on 30-01-1980 was appointed in KSRTC only in the year 1996. But the respondents therein were appointed during 1990. Observing that the petitioner has W.P.(c) No.5099/2012 -3- not completed the stipulated period of service in each grade to qualify for promotion and that the respondents 2 and 3 therein had acquired such qualifications prior to the petitioner, the request for grant of notional seniority from the date of advice cannot be granted. Observing that the petitioner does not have the minimum qualifying service of 10 years making him eligible for grant of pension, he is declared as entitled for ex-gratia under the scheme formulated. However seniority of the petitioner was re- assigned above respondents 2 and 3 in the said writ petition.
2. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 to the extent it denied, re-fixation of seniority and grant of notional promotions and the consequential monetary benefits. It is evident from Ext.P2 judgment that, this court had already declared that the petitioner is entitled for re-fixation of seniority based on his date of effective advice as per Rule 27 (c) of Part-II KS & SSR. On the basis of Ext.P2 judgment it was obligatory on the part of respondents to W.P.(c) No.5099/2012 -4- make notional re-fixation of seniority of the petitioner treating his date of joining as the date of advice. He should have been placed above other persons who were advised subsequent to his date of advice. The qualifying service of the petitioner ought to have been re-fixed on the basis of such notional fixation of seniority. So also the eligibility for grade promotions should have been worked out on notional basis inorder to fix the last drawn pay of the petitioner. As directed in Ext.P2 judgment, the consequential monetary benefits should have been paid to the petitioner.The stand now taken by the respondent in Ext.P3 is squarely against the directions contained in Ext.P2 judgment. In view of Ext.P2 judgment which had attained finality and in view of provisions contained in Rule 27 (c), stand taken by the respondent in Ext.P3 cannot be sustained.
3. Therefore the writ petition is allowed. Exhibit P3 is hereby quashed. The respondent is directed to re-fix the retirement benefits due to the petitioner on the basis of notional re-fixation of his seniority and length of service W.P.(c) No.5099/2012 -5- above those persons who were appointed on the basis of subsequent advices. Eligibility for pension shall be decided on the basis of the date of appointment so re-fixed. Service benefits to the petitioner shall be notionally re-fixed granting all eligible grade/promotions. However, it is made clear that the petitioner will not eligible for payment of any arrears of pay on the basis of such re-fixation. The arrears of pension if any eligible shall be paid and consequential terminal benefits based on the re-fixation shall be disbursed to the petitioner. The emoluments due under the above direction shall be paid, after taking necessary steps for re-fixation, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE AMG True copy P.A. to Judge