B SAROJINI AMMA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned single judge of this court referred all these cases to a Bench for an authoritative pronouncement on the scope and ambit of Rule 13 B of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules. Scope of the said rule earlier came up for consideration before a single judge of this court in K.A. Mathew v. State of Kerala and others (ILR 1985 (1) Kerala 657). Learned judge who referred the matter felt that some of the contentions raised by the petitioners were not considered by the learned single judge in Mathew s case. Consequently it was felt that an authoritative pronouncement on those aspects is necessary. Hence these cases are before us.

(2.) When the matter came up for hearing, we heard Senior counsel Sri. N. Dharmadan, Sri K.P. Dandapani, Sri K.R.B. Kaimal, Sri V. A. Mohammed,Com Sri. B. Reghunathan and Smt I. Sheela Devi and also learned Government pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) Before we deal with the rival contentions raised by the counsel on either side, we may refer to the facts in O.P. No 18062 of 2000 which is taken as the leading case. Petitioners herein are Head Draftsman in the Survey and Land Records Wing of the Revenue Department. They completed 50 years of age in 1992 and had also put in 25 years of service and were given higher pay on completion of 25 years of service. They were all aspiring for promotion to the post of Technical Assistant.