T.P. ARAVINDAKSHAN Vs. THE COMMISSIONER, GURUVAYOOR DEVESWOM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in WP(C) No. 12916/2007 challenge Exts.P11 and P12 orders delaying and curtailing the benefits granted under Ext.P2. They also seek the benefit of time bound higher grade in accordance with Exts.P3 to P7 with effect from the date, on which they have completed 25 years of service.

(2.) PETITIONERS in WP(C) No. 12916/2007 have joined the Kshethra Kalanilayam under Guruvayoor Devaswom as Krishnanattam Artists during the period from 1967 to 1971 after severe training and practice for a period of ten years. As the salary given to the employees of Kshethra Kalanilayam was very meager, representations were made by the employees of the Devaswom; and the Guruvayoor Devaswom appointed an expert committee to submit a report on the pay structure of the Krishnanattam Artists. The report submitted by the expert committee was approved by the Devaswom and the pay structure of Krishnanattam Artists were revised with effect from 01.07.1993. On 25.11.1998, the Government of Kerala implemented Time Bound Higher Grade (TBHG) to all its employees, who are stagnating in the entry post/promotion post/TBHG for more than a specified period. On 20.06.2002, the Guruvayoor Devaswom implemented the scheme to its employees and on 04.09.2002, the 2nd respondent extended the benefit of TBHG to the petitioners with effect from the date they have completed 25 years of service, i.e., with effect from 1994 -1996. On 16.12.2002, the 1st respondent cancelled the order and ordered to recover the benefit of TBHG granted to the petitioners. This order was challenged before this Court in WP(C) No. 32232/2005, which was disposed of directing the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter afresh. The 1st respondent reconsidered the matter and held that since the salary revision on 01.07.1993 should be treated as a first higher grade, any other higher grade can be granted by reckoning the service after 01.07.1993 only and not from the date of entry to service. The 1st respondent decided to implement time bound higher grade only from 02.09.2002, which is the date of the order extending the benefit to the petitioners. However, on 26.05.2005, the 2nd respondent informed the petitioners that the TBHG will be implemented only with effect from May 2005. The petitioners point out that the Devaswom has no authority to curtail the benefit to the petitioners alone, which is granted by the State Government and implemented in Guruvayoor Devaswom. It is with this background, they have come up before this Court.

(3.) THE petitioner in WP(C) No. 19842/2008 joined the Kshethra Kalanilayam on 01.01.1972 as Edakka Player. This, according to the petitioner, was after severe training and practice for a period of ten years. The salary of the employees of the Kshethra Kalanilayam was very meager. On 25.11.1998, the Government of Kerala implemented TBHG to all its employees, who are stagnating in the entry post/promotion post/TBHG for more than a specified period. On 20.06.2002, the Guruvayoor Devaswom implemented the scheme to its employees. On 04.09.2002, the 2nd respondent extended the benefit of TBHG to the petitioner with effect from 01.01.1997, on which he had completed 25 years service. On 16.12.2002, the 1st respondent cancelled the order and ordered to recover the benefit of TBHG granted to the petitioner. The petitioner approached this Court with W.P.(C) No. 34205/2003, which was disposed of directing the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter afresh. Later, the 1st respondent reconsidered the matter and held that since the salary revision on 01.07.1993 should be treated as a first higher grade, any other higher grade can be granted by reckoning the service after 01.07.1993 only and not from the date of entry in service. The 1st respondent decided to implement the TBHG only from 02.09.2002, which is the date of the order extending the benefit to the petitioner. However, on 26.05.2005, the 2nd respondent informed the petitioner that the TBHG will be implemented only with effect from May 2005. The petitioner points out that the Devaswom has no authority, whatsoever, to curtail the benefit to the petitioner, which is granted by the State Government and implemented in Guruvayoor Devaswom. According to the petitioner, as per GO(P) No. 3000/98/Fin dated 25.11.1998, the higher grades are to be granted on completion of 10, 18 and 23 years of service. Therefore, on completion of 23 years of service, the petitioner is entitled to get the third TBHG from S9 scale to S12 scale. However, by Ext.P3, he was granted only S11 scale, that too, after completion of 25 years of service. His further grievance is that by Ext.P10, the Local Fund Audit approved the grant of higher grade on completion of 25 years of service; and according to them, it can only be to S10 scale, i.e., the next higher grade. As the petitioner was granted only the first time bound higher grade after 25 years of service, Exts.P10 and P11 orders delaying and curtailing the benefits granted under Ext.P2 are patently illegal and arbitrary; according to the petitioner. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.