Kerala High Court
N.G.Varghese vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 20 July, 2010
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 27568 of 2009(M)
1. N.G.VARGHESE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM),
3. THE FINANCIAL ADVISER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SMT.S.K.DEVI
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :20/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.27568 OF 2009(M)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner entered the service of the Board in the year 1976 as Tracer and retired from service as Assistant Engineer(Civil) on 31.12.2002. In this writ petition his claim is in relation to the benefit of 1990 pay revision. According to the petitioner in terms of the options permitted, he opted for the scale of Tracer till 1.8.1988. His case is that although the option was initially accepted, thereafter it was rejected on the ground that as on the effective date of option, post of Tracer was not in existence. Pursuant to the direction in Ext.P1 judgment in O.P.No.16733/05, the matter was reconsidered and Ext.P7 is the final order that was passed, based on which recovery is ordered to be effected as per Ext.P6 and P9. It is in this circumstance the writ petition is filed.
2. However, a reading of Ext.P7, the basic order, shows that the order was passed without hearing the petitioner and also without adverting to paragraphs 2(b) and 4 of Ext.P8, the Board order NO.732/93 dated 21.4.1993, on the strength of which the WPC.No.27568 /09 :2 : petitioner contends that for the purpose of option the post of Tracer was notionally in existence till 1.8.88. Since that aspect was not considered by the first respondent while passing Ext.P7, I am inclined to direct that the claim of the petitioner for option to the scale of pay of Tracer till 1.8.88 for the benefit of 1990 pay revision should be considered by the first respondent and orders on the claim of the petitioner in this behalf shall be passed. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 2months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment and before orders are passed, petitioner should also be given an opportunity of hearing.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/