IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 13820 of 2006(S) --------------------------------------- OA.NO.503/2004 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- K.RATHNAKARAN, AGD 51 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, SENIOR GANGMAN/ GANG NO.1. SOUTHERN RAILWAY, QUILON, RESIDING AT MADATHIL VEEDU, PERUMPUZHA POST, KUNDARA, QUILON DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR. T.C. GOVINDASWAMY, SMT. HEERA, MR.C.RAJENDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O. CHENNAI 3. 2. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM- 14. 3. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM - 14. R1 TO R3 BY MR. VARGHESE P.THOMAS, SR. S.C, RAILWAYS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.13820/2006-S: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH IN O.A. 503/2004 DT. 20/03/2006. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE O.A. 503/2004 DT. 27/06/2004 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DT. 19/10/2004. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REJOINDER DT. 02/01/2005. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT REPORTED IN 1996 (1) SLJ 116 (SC) REFERRED TO IN THE O.A. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2001 (2) ATJ 1. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN 2002 (1) ATJ 28. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN BADARI PRASAD AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (2006 SCC (L & S) 92). EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN BHADEIRAJ V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (REPORTED IN 2006 SCC L&S 89). EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN INDERPAL YADAV AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (2006 SCC L & S 119). RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. prv. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 13820 OF 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd January, 2009. JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. The applicant in O.A 503/2004 is the writ petitioner. The said O.A was dismissed by Ext.P1 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 20.3.2006. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the case are the following:- 2. The petitioner joined the service of the Railways as a casual employee. After a trade test he was appointed as casual employee in the post of Blacksmith (skilled) on 5.5.1983. On 29.10.1983 he was granted temporary status in that post. The designation of that post was changed as Skilled Casual Labour (Blacksmith) which is a group 'C' post with a scale of pay of Rs.3050- 4590. Leaving the unnecessary details aside, the next relevant fact is that he was regularised in the group D post of Gangman on 31.3.1997 in the scale of pay of Rs.2610-3540. It is common case that till such time he was working in the post of skilled artisan (Blacksmith) which is a group 'C' post as a temporary status employee. On his regularisation in group D post of Gangman he WPC 13820/2006 2 joined duty in that post. The petitioner claimed that he may be granted the scale of pay of group 'C' post as also the basic pay drawn by him should be protected on his regularisation in the post of Gang Man. 3. After a few rounds of litigation finally his representation claiming protection of the scale of pay as also the basic pay was considered by the competent authority as per the direction of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench and rejected by Annexure A4 order. Though not relevant, we notice the fact that in the meantime the writ petitioner has been promoted to the post of Senior Gangman/Senior Trackman. By the impugned order Annexure A4, it was found that the petitioner is not entitled to get protection of the scale of pay but he is entitled to get protection of pay to the extent possible on his regularisation in 1997. As Gangman his pay has been fixed in the scale of pay of Rs.2610- 3540 at its maximum. That means his pay was fixed as Rs.3540/-. 4. Being dissatisfied with Annexure A4 the original application was filed. The Tribunal considered the rival contentions and held that petitioner is not entitled to get protection of the scale of pay. He may be entitled to get protection of pay but the same has been granted to the extent possible by putting him in the WPC 13820/2006 3 maximum of the scale of group D post of Gangman, it was held. 5. Attacking the above decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, this writ petition is filed. An employee regularised in Group D post has no right to claim the scale of pay applicable to Group 'C' post on the ground that he was working as a casual employee in that post with temporary status. But on regularisation in the lower post he is entitled to get pay protection. The same has been granted to the extent permissible by placing him at the maximum of pay of the lower post (Rs.2610-3540). Therefore, we find nothing wrong with Annexure A4 and also with Ext.P4 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal affirming Annexure A4. In the result writ petition fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: