IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2010 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 37201 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. R.SHAJI,AGED 50 YEARS,S/O.M.A.RASHEED, SHAJI MANZIL,AVANAVANCHERRY.P.O,ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SYAUDEEN,AGED 46 YEARS,S/O.MUHAMMED KUNJU,KUNNUVILA,KIZHAKKETHIL,PEROOR.P.O,KOLLAM. 3. BABU KURIAN,AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.ABRAHAM KURIAN,P UTHENPURACKAL VEEDU,SANTHI NAGAR COLONY,PALIYAKKARA.P.O,THIRUVALLA. 4. K.T.USMAN,AGED 44 YEARS,S/O.SOOPPI, KOLOTH THAZHA HOUSE,KALLACHI,VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.R.SANTHOSH BABU SRI.P.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,TRANSPORT BHAVAN,TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C,DEPOT,ATTINGAL. 3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C,DEPOT,ATTINGAL. 4. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC,THOTTILPADAM DEPOT,KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR,SC, KSRTC FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.37201/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE LIST PUBLISHED BY THE PSC. (1ST & 2ND PAGE) P2 : COPY OF ADVISE MEMO DATED 13/01/1993. P3 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP 9757/92 DATED 23/02/96. P4 : COPY OF ADVISE MEMO DATED 03/04/1996. P5 : COPY OF ATTENDANCE STATEMENT FROM 3/93 TO 4/96. P6 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 06/01/2006. P7 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 21/09/2007. P8 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 3/7/2006. P9 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION. P10 : COPY OF PAY SLIPS FOR SEP. & NOV. 2009. P11 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 10/04/96 IN CCC 91/1996. P12 : COPY OF LIST OF PERSONS WHO RECEIVED ARREAR SALARY. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.37201 of 2009 (U) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 6th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P10 to the extent the pay granted to the petitioners has been reduced by the 1st respondent. 2. According to the petitioners, they were included in the ranked list published by the Public Service Commission on 18/05/1992 for the post of Conductor in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. However, they were initially advised for appointment as conductor on daily wages, and were regularised only in 1996, on being again advised by the PSC for regular appointment. 3. However, they were given the benefit of Exts.P6 to P8 and their pay was fixed treating them as regular employees on completion of initial 240 days service on daily wage basis. Accordingly, their pay was also fixed and was being paid. However without issuing any notice or other intimation to the petitioners, WP(C) No.37201/2009 -2- their pay was reduced in November, 2009. It was thereupon that this writ petition has been filed. 4. The stand taken by the KSRTC in the statement filed in this case is that the petitioners were ineligible for the benefit of Exts.P6 to P8 and that they were wrongly given the benefit of these orders. It is stated that based on an audit objection, the irregular fixation of pay in 1997 and 2006 scales, were modified subject to realisation of the excess drawn by the petitioners. 5. Admittedly, the petitioners were given the benefit of Exts.P6 to P8 and their pay was accordingly fixed. If for any reason, such fixation of pay is to be modified on subsequent occasion, such modification could have been done by the KSRTC only after giving notice to the affected parties and in compliance with the principles of natural justice. In this case, admittedly, notice has not been given to the affected parties and therefore, the refixation of pay ordered in the case of the petitioners, has been done in violation of the principles of natural justice. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to intervene with Ext.P10. 6. Therefore, the refixation of pay affected in the case of WP(C) No.37201/2009 -3- the petitioners to their detriment, with effect from November, 2009, is set aside, and it is directed that if the respondent Corporation is to refix the pay of the petitioners, the same shall be done only after issuing notice to them and allowing them an opportunity of hearing in this matter. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the respondent Corporation to initiate fresh action for refixation of pay in compliance with the principles of natural justice, quashing Ext.P10, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg