VENUGOPAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is from the judgment dismissing O. P. No. 5157 of 1970 by the 1st petitioner therein. Petitioners 2 to 6 in the original petition are respondents 3 to 7 in this appeal. The appellant and respondents 3 to 7 were selected by the Public Service Commission on 2nd July 1964 pursuant to a notification dated 4th November 1963 issued by the public Service Commission for appointment as Assistant Registrars in the co-operative Department. Two other persons were also chosen at the same selection; one Thomas and another Surendran. They were appointed and deputed for training and afterwards were given the pay scale of R. 310-600, one of the revised pay scales applicable to Assistant Registrars. The appellant and respondents 3 to 7 who were appointed after 1st July 1968 on which date the revised pay scales came into force were granted only the other and the lower pay scale fixed by the order of Government applicable to persons directly recruited as Assistant registrars in the Co-operative Department. There were two scales of pay applicable to Assistant Registrars of the Co-operative Department; Rs. 310-600 for Assistant Registrar appointed by transfer from the category of Senior inspectors and Rs. 250-600 for those appointed as Assistant Registrars by direct recruitment. The special rules applicable provided for appointment of Senior inspectors by transfer as Assistant Registrars In fact, most of the places of assistant Registrars were to be taken up by Senior Inspectors; only 25 per cent being reserved for direct recruits. We may also mention that before the revision of pay scales the Senior Inspectors were on the grade of Rs. 190-300 with an allowance of Rs. 30. As a result of the revision, the pay scale was enhanced to Rs. 225 450.

(2.) TWO points have been raised by counsel on behalf of the appellant which were raided before the learned single judge as well: (1)The granting of the scale of Rs. 310-600 to the two persons, Thomas and surendran who stood in all respects in the same footing as the appellant and respondents 3 to 7, is discriminatory and (2) the fixation of two scales of pay for Assistant Registrars who have to discharge the same functions and duties is also discriminatory and violative of Art. 16 of the Constitution.

(3.) WE see no grounds to interfere with the judgment under appeal. WE dismiss the Writ Appeal and direct the parties to bear their respective costs. Dismissed. . .