VISWAMBHARAN NAIR K R Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners are Upper Division Clerks in the Labour Department. Both the Petitioners commenced their service as Lower Division Clerks. They were promoted as U.D. Clerks on 30.6.1988 and 15.10.1988 respectively. Based on the notification enabling to exercise option from the senior most Upper Division Clerks of the Department for appointment as Assistant Labour Officer Grade II both the Petitioners exercised their option for appointment as Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II which is in the executive wing prior to the occurrence of vacancies in that cadre. The cadres up to Junior Superintendent in the department belong to the ministerial wing. However, they were not appointed by transfer as Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II based on the said option on account of non availability of vacancies in the cadre of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II. In short despite the exercise of option the Petitioners continued in the cadre of Upper Division Clerks which is on the ministerial wing. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioners challenging Ext.P10 whereby their claim for granting the first time bound higher grade in the scale of pay of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II and the second time bound higher grade in the scale of pay applicable to Assistant Labour Officer Grade I were rejected.

(2.) The claim of the Petitioners for the aforesaid grades is founded on the option made by them for appointment by transfer as Assistant Labour Officer Grade II. According to them, the option exercised by them had become final. Therefore, they should have been treated as gone over to the category of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II by appointment by transfer for the purpose of time bound grade promotions attached to the post of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-I and Grade-II. The Petitioners are not disputing the correctness of the facts based on which their claim was rejected as per Ext.P10. In other words, they are admitting the fact that despite their option they continued to be in the cadre of Upper Division Clerks.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed in this Writ Petition resisting the claims and contentions of the Petitioner. The fact that the Petitioners have opted for appointment by transfer to the category of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II has been admitted. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that despite the said option they were not appointed by transfer as Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II on account of non availability of vacancies in that cadre. On account of the said reasons, the Petitioners have continued in thecategory of Upper Division Clerks, it is contended. Further it is stated therein under the Kerala Ministerial Subordinate Service Rules a U.D. Clerk is eligible for promotion as Head Clerk and Junior Superintendent and Senior Superintendent etc. Taking into account the stagnation of the Petitioners in the category of Upper Division Clerks they have been given the due grade promotions to higher posts and granted the scale of pay applicable to the category of Head Clerks and Junior Superintendent. In the absence of appointment by transfer to the cadre of Assistant Labour Officer Grade-II, the Petitioners are not entitled to claim the grade promotions in the scale of pay applicable to Assistant Labour Officer Grade-I and Grade-II, viz., i.e. 5000-8150 and 6500-10550 respectively.