Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

V.Vasudevan vs State Of Kerala on 9 October, 2009

Author: Antony Dominic

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19765 of 2007(C)


1. V.VASUDEVAN, RETD.SKIPPER, VARSHA VIHAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION

3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.R.KURUP

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :09/10/2009

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
             --------------------------------------------------
                W.P.(C) NO.19765 OF 2007 (C)
             --------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 9th day of October, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P4 and P7.

2. In so far as the challenge against Ext.P4 is concerned, the grievance of the petitioner is confined to clause 5(2) wherein it is provided that financial benefits including arrears of salary etc. will be granted only with effect from 26.2.2007. In WP(c). No.16475/07 & connected cases by judgment dated 26.8.2009, this court has already set aside the aforesaid provision in Ext.P4 and therefore the challenge against Ext.P4 stands covered in favour of the petitioner by virtue of the judgment referred to above.

3. In so far as Ext.P7 is concerned, by this order, petitioner has been posted as a Skipper subject to the condition that his pay will be fixed in the scale 2610-3680 which is applicable to last grade employees. His complaint is that as a Skipper he was in command of the vessel enjoying enjoying disciplinary control of other employees working in the vessel. It is stated that despite this, in Ext.P7 employees like Assistant Engineer who were WPC .No.19765/07 :2 : working below the petitioner in the vessel have been fixed in the lower scale of pay of Rs.6675-10550 where as the petitioner, who was working in a higher category had been fixed in the scale of pay as applicable to last grade employees. Ext.P8 is the duties and responsibilities of a Skipper, which show that the Skipper is in command of the vessel and enjoy disciplinary control as well. If that be so, prima facie it would appear that by fixing the petitioner's pay at lower scale of pay, as compared even to his subordinates, he has been discriminatory. Therefore, the matter needs to be re-examined by the 3rd respondent, duly adverting to the position held by the petitioner as a Skipper. The matter shall be considered as above, as expeditiously as possible within 2 months.

Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/