P. RAGHAVAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal has been filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 15384 of 2005 challenging the judgment dated 20.1.2016, by which, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The writ petition has been filed challenging Exts.P7, P9, P11 and P12 and the petitioner sought for a direction that the time bound higher grade granted to him in terms of Ext. P5 has to be confirmed.

(2.) Short facts as has been stated in the writ petition are; the petitioner was originally in employment of Kerala State Housing Board and later, he got employment in Kerala Water Authority. The petitioner had approached this Court in an earlier occasion by filing an original petition and by a common judgment dated 13.8.1998 in O.P. No. 11018 of 1994 and connected cases, this Court directed the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) to consider the fixation of pay, taking into consideration Rules 28, 28A and 37 of Part I KSR and also the observations made in the judgment. That was a case, in which, the petitioners claimed that they were entitled for protection of their pay while they were working in Government service and later, they were appointed in the KWA on the advice of the Public Service Commission (PSC). According to the petitioner, pursuant to the said judgment, orders were passed by the KWA fixing the pay of the petitioner in terms of the said judgment and later, by order dated 5.7.2001, produced as Ext. P5, the petitioner was granted higher grade with effect from 15.9.1999. While granting the higher grade, the KWA also took into consideration the period of service of the petitioner as Ist Grade Draftsman in the Kerala State Housing Board during the period from 15.9.1989 to 17.11.1994. Audit objection was raised stating that the petitioner's prior service in the Kerala State Housing Board (KSHB) as Draftsman Grade I from 15.9.1989 to 17.11.1994 should not have been taken into consideration for granting higher grade in the KWA. Ext. P7 is the said objection, which was prepared during the period from 3.5.2002 to 7.5.2002 and Ext. P8 dated 29.3.2003 is the answer given by the Executive Engineer. However, the audit objection was confirmed as per letter dated 11.11.2003 issued by the Resident Audit Officer to the Executive Engineer, the relevant portion of which is stated as under: - -

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent supporting the stand taken in Ext. P11. It was inter alia stated that the petitioner while working in the KSHB as 1st Grade Draftsman was relieved on 17.11.1994 in order to take up appointment as Draftsman Grade I in the KWA. His pay was fixed with effect from 18.11.1994 on the basis of the decision taken by the KWA. It is stated that there are no orders to reckon the service in the KSHB for grade promotion in the KWA and therefore, the time bound higher grade granted with effect from 15.9.1999 was not in order. It is also stated that the scale of pay of Draftsman Grade I in the KSHB and KWA are not identical. Although the petitioner was granted pay fixation as per Rule 30 of Part I K.S.R. in the post of Draftsman Grade I in the KWA, he was not granted increments in that post by reckoning prior service in the KSHB.