K KHARIDASAN NAIR Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petitioner is the appellant. The challenge against Ext. P 6 order of termination was upheld by the learned Single Judge as per the impugned Judgment and directed his reinstatement. But the learned Single Judge made it clear that the "petitioner will not be entitled to get salary from 22-11-2003 till the date of reinstatement". Of course, the learned Single Judge made it further clear that there shall not be any break in service and the period that he remained out of duty shall be treated as duty "for all purposes, except the actual salary".

(2.) The facts are simple. The appellant entered service as Peon in the Kerala State Electricity Board on 4-8-1972. While working so, the post of Peon was redesignated as Office Attendant. While working as Office Attendant, he was detailed for duty as Electricity Worker. He was all the while considered as Office Attendant and was awarded higher scales on two occasions as that were applicable to Office Attendant. He continued in service even beyond the age of 55 years obviously because going by the bipartite settlement between Union representing the workmen and the Kerala State Electricity Board provided that those who entered service prior to 1-7-1972 shall be superannuated only at the age of 60 years. In Ext. P 6, the Board came to the conclusion that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of such continuance. Accordingly, his services were terminated as per Ext. P 6 with effect from 21-11-2003.

(3.) The contention of the appellant was that though he was detailed for duty as Electricity Worker, he had been all the while treated as Office Attendant, a category to which he was appointed in the services of Electricity Board. Even if he had been an Electricity Worker, going by Clause.21(i) of the bipartite settlement, Electricity Workers in wage groups I, II, III and IV who entered service prior to 1-9-1972 can continue in service until they attain the age of 60.