Kerala High Court
M.E. Uthama Kurup vs Vice Admiral Anil Kumar Chawla on 10 February, 2020
Author: S.Manikumar
Bench: S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 21ST MAGHA, 1941
Con.Case(C).No.2417 OF 2018 IN OP (CAT). 271/2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP (CAT) 271/2016(Z) OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
M.E. UTHAMA KURUP, AGED 55 YEARS
S/O T.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, FOREMAN (RADIO),
NSRY, NAVAL BASE, KOCHI-682004,RESIDING AT
ROHITAS, PERUMTHURUTHU, KALAVOOR P.O.ALEPPEY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ
SRI.S.BIJU (KIZHAKKANELA)
RESPONDENT/S:
VICE ADMIRAL ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA
AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOW TO THE
PETITIONER,THE FLAG OFFICER IN COMMANDING IN
CHIEF, HEAD QUARTERS, SOUTHERN NAVAL COMMAND,
NAVAL BASE, KOCHI-682 004.
R1 BY SMT.C.G.PREETHA, CGC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 10.02.2020, ALONG WITH
Con.Case(C).757/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019
..2..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 21ST MAGHA, 1941
Con.Case(C).No.757 OF 2019 IN OP (CAT). 213/2017
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP (CAT) 213/2017 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
1 C.J.PAULOSE, AGED 56 YEARS, SON OF VARKEY JOSEPH,
ASSISTANT FOREMAN(ICE) NSRY, NAVAL BASE, KOCHI-4,
RESIDING AT CHOOTHUKALAYIL HOUSE, S N PURAM, ALUVA
P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683101
2 V.A.RAJAN, AGED 63 YEARS, SON OF ACHUTHA PILLAI,
FOREMAN ICE (RETIRED) NSRY, NAVAL BASE, KOCHI-4,
RESIDING AT KAUSTHUHAM, KIZHAKEPRAM, N.PARAVUR ,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683513
BY ADVS.
SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ
SRI.S.BIJU (KIZHAKKANELA)
SRI.SANJAY JOHNSON
RESPONDENT/S:
VICE ADMIRAL ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA,
AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOW TO THE
PETITIONER,THE FLAG OFFICER IN COMMANDING IN
CHIEF, HEAD QUARTERS,SOUTHERN NAVAL COMMAND,NAVAL
BASE, KOCHI-682 004.
R1 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.02.2020, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).2417/2018, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019
..3..
-------------------------------------------------
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019
-------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
S.Manikumar, CJ.
Alleging willful disobedience of the directions issued in common judgment dated 20.07.2016 in OP(CAT) Nos. 271 of 2016 and 213 of 2017 in letter and spirit, instant contempt cases have been filed.
2. After considering rival submissions made, this Court at paragraph 11 of the judgment dated 20.07.2016 in OP(CAT) Nos. 271 of 2016 and 213 of 2017 ordered thus:
"11. After hearing both the sides, we find that Ext.P3 order passed by the Tribunal declining interference with Annexure A10 is not correct or sustainable and they are liable to be intercepted. We do so. We find it appropriate to direct the Directorate to reconsider the matter in the light of their own findings as given in Annexure A11 and to pass appropriate orders with reference to the financial implications forwarded to them by the Flag Officer Commanding in Chief, Kochi, as per Annexure A12 and to pass appropriate orders for rectification of the anomaly at the earliest, at any rate within three months from the date of CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..4..
receipt of a copy of the judgment. Both the Original Petitions are allowed to the said extent. No costs"
3. After filing CO(C) No.2417/2018, an additional affidavit dated 29.03.2019 has been filed by the respondent, stating that the directions of this Court have been complied with and that a consequential order dated 18.03.2019 has also been issued by the Headquarters Southern Naval Command, Naval Base, Kochi addressed to the Principal Director, Directorate of Civilian Personnel Services, Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (Navy)/Dy Dir (Legal), Talkatora Annexe Building, First Floor, Room 101, New Delhi. Thus, in the additional affidavit, it is stated that the anomaly in the pay scale to the post of Senior Chargeman in Naval Dockyard and Naval Armament Inspectorate Organisation (NAIO) has been rectified and accordingly, orders have been issued. For brevity, paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the additional affidavit dated 29.03.2019 are extracted hereunder:
"6. With regard to the contentions of the petitioner in Para 7 and Para 8 of the reply affidavit, it is humbly submitted that Civilian Establishment list (CE list) has been issued by the respondents in accordance with the administrative procedure involved. There is no Government Order or any other authority which specifies any change in the pay scales of Chargeman -I (Foreman prior to 01.01.1996) and CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..5..
subsequent promotional hierarchy. It is pertinent to mention that the pay scales of hierarchical posts in NASO were identical to that of the NAIO and Naval Dockyards. The disparity in pay scale existed only in the post of Senior Chargeman viz Rs 5000-8000/5500-9000. As regards Shri CJ Poulose and Shri VA Rajan, it is submitted that the individuals were already drawing the pay scale of Rs 5500- 9000 in the post of Chargeman- (Foreman prior to 01.01.1996) as on 01.01.06 and are not covered by the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court. The Contention of the petitioner that two petitioners in OP (CAT) 213/2017 viz Shri CJ Poulose and Shri VA Rajan have to be granted the pay scale of Assistant Foreman without any Government order is misinterpretation of the Judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court and Such an action tantamount to violation of Government policies and overriding of the Judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court.
7. It is further humbly submitted that the respondents have taken every action in accordance with the direction issued by the Hon'ble Court and the claim of the petitioner that a Foreman in the pre revised scale is to be placed as Assistant Foreman under the 5th CPC and promotions have to be granted are neither covered by any court order nor by any Government Orders. Apparently, the averments and contentions of the petitioner in the reply affidavit are not prayed for in the OP (CAT) and is an attempt to mislead this Hon'ble Court. The respondents have complied with the specific direction issued by this Hon'ble Court and have CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..6..
given the revised pay to all the individuals in the month of March and the financial benefits applicable to the petitioners upto the date of court order will be disbursed on receipt of Charged Expenditure Sanction for which the action has already been taken by the respondent as per Annexure R1(d). The due drawn statements of arrears for the balance period have been forwarded to Audit authorities and will be paid within 02 weeks. As such there exists not even an iota of wilful disobedience of court order on the part of the respondents."
4. Letter dated 18.03.2019 stated supra, is reproduced hereunder:
CONTEMPT PETITION IN OP(CAT) NOs. 271/2016 AND 213/2017 FILED BY SHRI ME UTHAMAKURUP & SHRI K BHASKARAN
1. Refer to IHQ of MoD/DCPS e-mails dated 16 Oct 18 and 06 Dec 18.
2. The Due-Drawn Statements in respect of the following petitioners are forwarded herewith:-
(a) Shri MK Asokan, FM
(b) Shri CK Mukundan, FM
(c) Shri PP Ravindran, FM
(d) Shri S Mohanachandran, Ex-FM
(e) Shri PK Venugopal, FM (PP&C)
(f) Shri SA Rajan, FM
(9) Shri M Asokapaniker, TA(ENG)
(h) Shri K Krishnankutty, Ex-CM
(j) Shri AC Samuel, Ex-CM
(k) Shri K Bhaskaran, FM(L)
(l) Shri PV Gangadharan, Ex-FM
(m) Shri TK Gokuldas, Ex-FM
(n) Shri R Jyothi, Ex-FM
(p) Shri E Joseph Samuel, Ex-CM
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019
..7..
(q) Shri K Sasi, Ex-FM
(r) Shri CS Gokulan, Ex-FM
(s) Shri M Vijayan, Ex-FM
(t) Shri KK Sivadasan, Ex-FlM
(u) Shri K Mohanakumar, Ex-FM
(v) Shri ME Uthamakurup, FM (Radio)
(w) Shri TA VWilson, Ex-TA
3. Out of 23 cases, the Audit Authority has returned 02 cases viz., Shri CJ Poulose, TA and Shri VA Rajan, Ex-FM unauctioned stating that they were drawing the pay scale of 5500-175-9000 in the post of Chargeman-1 (Foreman prior to 01 Jan 96) as on 01 Jan 96, and hence they are not covered under the instant court orders, wherein specifically the Scale of pay of Chargeman-ll (Senior Chargeman prior to 01 Jan 16) has been revised upward to Rs 5500-175-9000. In this regard, AAO (N), Kochi letter PAY/112/CIV/CORRS/VOL-XI/030 dated 23 Jan 19 (copy enclosed) is relevant.
4. It is requested that sanction of Competent Authority towards Charged Expenditure may be forwarded to this Headquarters at the earliest for compliance of court order in iits entirety.
(Reshmi N Menon) Administrative Officer-ii Staff Officer (CP/L&D) for Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief Encl: As above Enclosure to HOSNC letter CS 2695/43/1768 dated 18 Mar 19 SL NAME DESIGNATION AMOUNT (in Rs.) No.
1. Shi MK Asokan FM 3,96,507
2. Shri PP Ravindran FM 55,435
3. Shri CK Mukundan FM 4,72,198 CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..8..
4. Shri S Mohanachandran FM (Retd.) 3,71,389
5. Shri PK Venugopal FM 4,46,276
6. Shri SA Rajan FM 4,19,674
7. Shri M Asokapaniker TA 4,18,611
8. Shri K Krishnankutty CM (Retd.) 1,92,499
9. Shri AC Samuel CM (Retd.) 3,58,695
10. Shri K Bhaskaran FM 4,25,361
11. Shri PV Gangadharan FM (Retd.) 3,02,011
12. Shri TK Gokuldas FM (Retd.) 1,60,637
13. Shri R Jyothi FM (Retd.) 3,55,715
14. Shri E Joseph Samuel CM (Retd.) 2,27,287
15. Shri K Sasi FM (Retd.) 2,40,419
16. Shri CS Gokulan FM (Retd.) 1,32,812
17. Shri M Vijayan FM (Retd.) 4,65,803
18. Shri KK SIvadasan FM (Retd.) 1,88,446
19. Shri K Mohanakumar FM (Retd.) 97,835
20. Shri ME Uthamakurup FM 3,74,725
21. Shri TA Wilson TA (Retd.) 2,41,334 GRAND TOTAL Rs. 63,43,669
5. A reply affidavit dated 13.03.2019 has been filed by the contempt petitioner in CO(C) No.2417 of 2018, inviting attention of this Court to the communication dated 04.03.2014 of the Junior Design Officer, Civilian Establishment Officer for Admiral Superintendent, Naval Ship Repair Yard, Kochi, addressed to the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief for SO (Establishment), Headquarters Southern Naval Command, Naval Base, Kochi, wherein financial implication on CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..9..
account of higher pay scale to the post of Chargeman has been arrived at in respect of 20 persons. According to the contempt petitioner, there is an error in computation of the financial implication and therefore, judgment dated 20.07.2016 has not been complied with in letter and spirit, for which action is sought for.
6. In additional affidavit dated 15.01.2020 filed in CO(C) No. 2417 of 2018, alleged contemnor has contended as follows:
The contempt petitioner is paid monthly salary in the revised pay scale since March, 2019 and the arrears of pay and allowances due to the petitioner worked out as per Annx.R1(e) at Rs.3,74,725/- was paid to him on 30 July 2019. Therefore, it is contended that the contempt petitioner has no case that the actual amount due to him is not paid. It is also contended that the amount of Rs.63,43,669/- shown in Annex.R1(d) represents the actual amount due, to the eligible petitioners in OP(CAT) Nos.213 of 2017 and 271 of 2016, which has been calculated in the revised pay scale of Rs.5,500-9,000 as directed by this Court, whereas the amount of Rs.71,67,769/- shown in Annex.A3 in CO(C) No.757/2019 is the tentative amount arrived at by the Department, calculated in respect of the petitioners in WP(C) No.1206/2009. According to him, Annex.R1(d) reflects the CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..10..
exact/accurate financial implication of the employer on account of the implementation of the direction of this Court with respect to 21 eligible petitioners in OP(CAT) Nos.271/2016 and 213/2017 excluding the contempt petitioners in CO(C) No.757/2019 as those individuals were already drawing the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 during the relevant period. Therefore, the amount shown in Annex.R1(d), i.e., Rs.63,43,669/- is the amount worked out as financial implication as per the direction for pay parity on the basis of Annex.A-11 and taking into account Annex.A-12 in respect of the eligible 21 petitioners. Therefore, according to the alleged contemnor, all the persons referred to in Annex.R1(d) are enjoying the revised pay scale since March, 2019 and have received the respective amounts due to them as arrears of pay and allowances before 30.07.2019 and the plea now raised as to non-
compliance with the direction in Annexure A1 judgment is unsustainable, in view of the facts mentioned above.
7. In CO(C) No.757 of 2019, alleged contemnor filed additional affidavit dated 31.01.2020. Inviting the attention of this Court to Annexure R1(d), which, according to him, reflects the exact/accurate financial implication of the employer on account of implementation of the direction of this Court as per judgment dated 20.07.2017 with CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..11..
respect to 21 eligible petitioners in OP(CAT) Nos.271/2016 and 213/2017, it is stated that the petitioners were already drawing the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 during the relevant period and therefore, the amount shown in Annex.R1(d) is the amount worked out as the financial implication on implementing pay parity on the basis of Annex.A11 and taking into account Annex.A12, in respect of the eligible 21 persons. It is further stated that the said amount has already been paid to the petitioners, and the same is substantiated by Annexures R1(c) & R1(d). It is pointed out that Civilian Establishment List has been prepared for the petitioners, who are Foreman and Chargeman, separately, being distinct category for administrative purpose. It is further pointed out that Annex.A3 pertains to only a tentative calculation of Rs.71,67,769/- in respect of 20 petitioners in WP(C) No.1206/2009 and on computation of the actual financial implication, the same was worked out to be Rs.63,43,669/-. Therefore, according to the alleged contemnor, Annex.R1(d) pertains to the financial implication of all the petitioners in OP (CAT) Nos.271/2016 and 213/2017 except the contempt petitioners in CO(C) No.757/2019. It is also pointed out that the audit authorities have observed that the said individuals were already drawing the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 during the relevant CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..12..
period, by virtue of their promotion to the post of Foreman prior to 01.01.1996, and that Annex.R1(d) contains the amount of Rs.63,43,669/- in respect of other 21 eligible persons other than the contempt petitioners.
8. According to the learned Central Government Counsel, a sum of Rs.73,00,000/- was fixed as the tentative financial implication, based on Annexures A11 & A12, study reports produced in the Original Application on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal submitted by the Department, and that the same is not conclusive. It is further submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, in common judgment dated 20.07.2016, a sum of Rs.63,43,669/- has been arrived at, as the financial implication. It is further submitted that all the amounts due and payable, as per the calculation made by the department have been paid, to all the petitioners, except the contempt petitioners in CO(C) No.757/2019, who are already drawing the scale of pay, and not entitled to additional benefits. Thus, according to the learned Central Government Counsel, respondent has complied with the directions of this Court, to reconsider the matter in the light of the findings given in Annexure A11 study report, and to pass appropriate orders with reference to the financial implications forwarded to them by CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..13..
the Flag Officer Commanding in Chief, Kochi, as per Annexure A12 and to pass appropriate orders for rectification of the anomaly, by reconsidering the matter and passing appropriate orders, rectifying the anomaly in 2018 itself. It is further pointed out that a consequential order has also been issued on 18.03.2019. Thus, according to the learned Central Government Counsel, there is no contempt, much less, willful contempt on the part of the respondent.
9. Though Sri.Johnson Gomez, learned counsel for the contempt petitioners, insisted that when the financial implications have been arrived at Rs.73,00,000/-, the amount disbursed does not amount to implementation of the directions in letter and spirit and thus contempt survives, we are not inclined to accept the said contention. Directions of this Court have been implemented. As regards the difference in financial implications and extension of benefit to the extent claimed by the contempt petitioners, it is always open to them to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. Detailed statement of financial implications arrived at on account of the implementation of the revision of pay scale has also been filed.
10. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the view that there is no contempt, much less, willful contempt on the part of the CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..14..
respondent, to proceed further, under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. If at all, petitioners have any grievance with regard to the method adopted for computation of financial implications and the denial of the alleged benefits on the basis of the tentative estimate of financial implication, it is always open to them to take appropriate recourse, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, CO(C)s are closed.
Sd/-
S.MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE Bka/13.02.2020 CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..15..
APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 2417/2018 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.7.2017 IN OPCAT NO 271/2016 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.2.2018 IN COC NO 203 NO 203 OF 2018 PASSED BY THE THIS HON'BLE COURT.
ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN IA NO 453/2018 DATED 23 RD MARCH 2018 IN OP(CAT) NO 213/2017 AND OP(CAT) 271/2016 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO CS 2695/43/1742 DATED 17TH OCTOBER 2018 ISSUED FORM HE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CON CASE 1729 OF 2018 DATED 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE HEAD QUARTERS, SOUTHERN NAVAL COMMAND, LETTER CS2695/43/1742 DATED 17.10.2018.
ANNEXURE R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE CIVILIAN ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER FOR BASE LOGISTICS OFFICER ADDRESSED TO THE JCDA-IN-CHARGE, AREA ACCOUNTS OFFICE, CDA, (NAVY), KOCHI-682015.
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..16..
ANNEXURE R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.02.2019 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE ADMIRAL SUPERINTENDENT BY THE COMMODORE AND ADDRESSED TO THE FLAG OFFICER COMMANDING IN CHIEF, HEAD QUARTERS, SOUTHERN NAVAL COMMAND, KOCHI.
ANNEXURE R1(D) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CS 2695/43/1768 DATED 18.03.2019.
ANNEXURE R1(E) TRUE COPY OF THE DUE DRAWN STATEMENT SHOWING THE AMOUNT DUE TO THE PERSONS REFERRED TO IN ANNEXURE R1(D) DESCRIBING THE BASIS OF COMPUTATION.
CO(C) Nos. 2417 of 2018 & 757 of 2019 ..17..
APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 757/2019 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.7.2017 IN OP CAT NO 213/2017.
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ANNEXURE A11(DIRECTORATE OF CIVILIAN PERSONNEL, INTEGRATED HEAD QUARTERS, MO DEF(NAVY), NEW DELHI,ORDER NO CP(P)/8416/6CPC/POLICY DATED 22-01-
2014) ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ANNEXURE A12(LETTER NO 1/2690/01 DATED 4TH MARCH 2014 ISSUED BY THE JUNIOR DESIGN OFFICER, CIVILIAN ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER, NAVAL SHIP REPAIR YARD, KOCHI TO FLAG OFFICER COMMANDING IN CHIEF.
ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIVILIAN ESTABLISHMENT CE LIST DATED 29-11-2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIVILIAN ESTABLISHMENT DATED 17-01-2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23-01- 2019 ISSUED BY THE SR.ACCOUNTS OFFICER TO THE ADMIRAL SUPERINTENDENT, NSRY, NAVAL BASE,KOCHI.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE R1 A TRUE COPY OF THE HQ SNC LETTER NO.CS 2695/43/1768 DATED 18/03/2019 BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER-II.
ANNEXURE R1 (B) TRUE COPY OF IHQ OF MOD (NAVY) ORDER CPT (L)/8000/OP(CAT) 271/2016 AND 213/2017 DATED 07/06/2019.