LAWS(MAD)-2025-3-147

D. ARUMUGAM Vs. BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Decided On March 25, 2025
D. ARUMUGAM Appellant
V/S
BOARD OF TRUSTEES Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus seeking interference with an order dtd. 1/2/2024, passed by the second respondent, Secretary, Chennai Port Trust and to consequentially direct the respondents to revise and fix the pension of the petitioner corresponding to the Board Level Executive post of Deputy Chairman Category I, Ports, in the pay scale of Rs.75,000.00 90,000 from 1/1/2007 till 31/12/2016 and in the pay scale of Rs.180000.00 320000 from 1/1/2017 onwards and pay arrears of pension and other benefits.

(2.) In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner, who is a senior citizen of advanced age, had stated that he had retired as Deputy Chairman of the Chennai Dock Labour Board (originally called the Madras Dock Labour Board). He claims that the said post of the Deputy Chairman of the Chennai Dock Labour Board is a Board Level Executive post of in Category I, Ports. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31/1/1998. The petitioner further stated that he had been initially appointed as Labour Welfare Officer (C1 II) on 1/7/1967. He had been subsequently promoted and as stated above, had finally retired as Deputy Chairman of the Chennai Dock Labour Board. The petitioner claims that there had been periodical Pay Revision Committees, which had been constituted by the Government of India. The petitioner places specific reliance on the Pay Revision Committee's recommendation, dtd. 10/1/2000.

(3.) The said recommendation of the Pay Revision Committee, on 10/1/2000, is interpreted by the petitioner and also argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it had been recommended that the post of Deputy Chairman of the Chennai Dock Labour Board or for that matter, any Dock Labour Board is to be construed as being equivalent to the post of the Deputy Chairman of the Port Trust, in this connection, the Chennai Port Trust. It is therefore pointed out that the petitioner's pay should be revised in accordance with the pay, which had been fixed or rather re-fixed for the post of the Deputy Chairman of the Chennai Port Trust. Claiming that the difference in pay and pension should be paid to him on and from the date of such revision, dtd. 10/1/2000, the writ petition has been filed.