JOHN K.V Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are materially connected in respect of non-grant of higher grade and recovery initiated against the petitioners on the basis of alleged mistaken payment of amounts, and for other related and consequential reliefs. Therefore, I heard them together and propose to pass this common judgment. The facts and documents available from W.P.(C) No.32655/2016 are relied upon for the disposal of the writ petitions.

(2.) Petitioner is working as a Clerk in the SMHS, Vazhavara. According to the petitioner, he is aggrieved by the denial of higher grade scale of pay by computing the service in the entry cadre and promotion posts. This court as per Ext.P3 judgment in W.P.(C) No.13970/2004 dated 7.2.2013 directed the State Government to give higher grade scale of pay to similarly situated persons. On the basis of the said judgment, 1st respondent passed Ext.P6 order in favour of similarly situated persons. Petitioner secured Ext.P7 judgment from this court in W.P.(C) No.26827/2013 along with others, whereby directions were issued to receive representation from the petitioner and consider the same in accordance with law, taking into account the judgment in W.P.(C) No.13970/2004 and the consequential Government Order. Accordingly Ext.P9 order has been passed by the 4th respondent, whereby higher grade was sanctioned to the petitioner, however, as per Ext.P10 proceedings, the Deputy Director of Education, Thodupuzha objected to the sanctioning of higher grade to the petitioner, which a ccording to the petitioner, is overlooking the orders passed by the 1st respondent in this regard. Therefore, According to the petitioner, Ext.P10 order is illegal and arbitrary, liable to be interfered with by this court.

(3.) A counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent, wherein it is submitted that, petitioner entered the service on 13.3.1990 as Full Time Menial and first higher grade has been allowed to him on 6.11.1999 on completion of 10 years of service including broken service. Petitioner was promoted as Clerk on 14.2.2005 and fixation was allowed to him as per rule 28A of the KS&SSR. Again on 1.3.2006, higher grade in the clerical cadre was sanctioned to him reckoning the last grade service also. As petitioner got promotion as Clerk within the period prescribed for time bound higher grade, sanctioning of higher grade on 1.3.2006 in the clerical cadre is clear violation of the existing Rules i.e., Government Letter dated 2.11.2001 and therefore, 3 rd respondent objected to the said pay fixation.