K G RAJAMOHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In W.P.(C) No. 4325 of 2012, the petitioners seek for a declaration that they are entitled for the pay and allowances on par with Librarians of Legislature Secretariat. 1st petitioner was working as Chief Librarian and the 2nd and 3rd petitioners were Librarians in the Kerala High Court Service. Subsequent to the filing of the Writ Petition, the Government issued Ext. P6 order confirming the recommendations made by the 9th Pay Revision Commission and hence the Writ Petition is amended challenging Ext. P6 and further seeks for a direction to the 1st respondent to issue appropriate orders revising their scale of pay as claimed. The 9th Pay Revision Commission recommended scale of pay for Chief Librarian at Rs. 32,110-44,640 and for the Librarian at Rs. 24040-38840. According to the petitioners as per Ext. P1, G.O.(Ms) No. 214/97/Home dated 27.8.1997, it is indicated that a decision has been taken in the meeting between the Chief Minister and the Chief Justice on 4.11.1995 whereby sanction was given to extend the effect of Government orders issued for the benefit of Government Secretariat staff to the corresponding categories of employees in the High Court of Kerala. The petitioners rely upon the scale of pay of the Chief Librarian and the Librarian of the Legislative Secretariat which was fixed at Rs. 36,140-46,640 and Rs. 32,110-44,640 respectively in the 9th Pay Revision Commission and claims parity of scale of pay. Petitioners further rely upon the recommendation made by the Chief Justice requesting the Governor to revise the scale of pay and allowances of the employees of the High Court in terms with the recommendations made by the Chief Justice. Ext. P3 is the said letter dated 13.4.2011. This letter was issued by the Chief Justice based on the recommendation of a committee of High Court Judges constituted by the Chief Justice explaining the disparity in the scale of pay of High Court employees in terms with the 9th Pay Revision Commission recommendation.

(2.) This Writ Petition was filed at a time when no orders were passed by the Government and complaining that changes were effected in the scale of pay of various categories of employees in the Secretariat General Administration, Finance Secretariat, the Law Secretariat, Legislative Secretariat, Kerala Raj Bhavan, Advocate General's Office and Kerala Public Service Commission in terms of Ext. PS. It is after the Writ Petition is filed that Ext. P6 order was passed by the Government declining the request made by the Chief Justice.

(3.) Counter affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent inter alia contending that the Government has accepted the recommendation of the Pay Revision Commission without making any changes. The Government while examining the report for revision of pay and allowances of the High Court employees has considered the report of the Judges Committee and Pay Revision Commission and has accepted the recommendation of the Pay Revision Commission in toto and pay scale was recommended as stated by the Pay Revision Commission. It is also contended that the Pay Revision Commission headed by former Justice Rajendra Babu has considered various aspects after discussions with Service organisations, representatives of employees and persons in similar posts. It is also indicated that the pre-revised scale of Chief Librarian and Librarian of Kerala Legislative Assembly was Rs. 16,650-23,200 and Rs. 13,610-20,700 respectively and that of the High Court were Rs. 12,930-20,250 and Rs. 11,070-18,450 respectively. When the Commission proposed a revised scale of pay for the post of Chief Librarian and Librarian of Kerala Legislative Assembly they were given two stage hike from corresponding revised scale of pay whereas while proposing the revised scale of pay of the Chief Librarian and Librarian of Kerala High Court they were given three stage hike from corresponding revised scale of pay. It is therefore contended that the pre-revised scale of pay of Chief Librarian of Kerala Legislative Assembly is higher than the similar post in the High Court It is also pointed out that the scale of pay of Assistant Registrar and Chief Librarian in High Court service had a pre-revised scale of Rs. 12,930-20,250. The revised scale of pay of Assistant Registrar is only Rs. 24,040-38,840, whereas that of Chief Librarian is Rs. 32,110-44,640. It is also pointed out that in respect of the scale of pay of Private Secretary to Judges, the pre-revised scale was Rs. 11,090-19,350 and that of Librarian was Rs. 11,070-18,450. After the revision of scale of pay, the Private Secretary to Judges will get Rs. 21,240-37,040 and the scale of pay of Librarian is Rs. 24,040-38,840. It is therefore contended that any further enhancement of scale of pay of Chief Librarian and Librarian will widen the disparity among the staff of the High Court. It would cause discontent among similarly placed posts and categories. With reference to the contentions regarding the recommendations made by the Chief Justice of the High Court it is pointed out that the Government has a constitutional right to examine the proposal of the Chief Justice relating to the salary of the staff of the High Court and to either grant approval or withhold it If the Government decides to decline the proposal, the High Court cannot exercise the jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus to the Government to accept the suggestions made by the Chief Justice. It is contended that there could be genuine differences in perception and honest difference of opinion between the Chief Justice and the Governor/State on the question of payment of salary, allowances etc., of High Court staff and cannot be treated as infraction on Article 229 of the Constitution. It is further submitted that Government has examined the proposal in detail and declined the proposal with the approval of Council of Ministers. Hence the 1st respondent sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition.